The revelation by Uttar Pradesh Chief Secretary Manoj Kumar Singh that UP alone accounts for 1,200 km of India’s 2,900 km access-controlled expressway network—about 42% of the national total—has sparked a wave of public scrutiny and online criticism. While the infrastructure development in Uttar Pradesh is being touted as a model for growth and connectivity, questions are being raised about the geographical imbalance in investment allocation. netizens across india, particularly from southern and eastern states, are expressing concerns over why similar levels of infrastructure spending are not being seen in their regions, despite significant tax contributions from these states.
Critics point out that several southern states, such as tamil Nadu, Karnataka, and Kerala, along with western states like maharashtra and Gujarat, are among the highest tax contributors to the central pool. Yet, they argue, these regions do not receive proportionate infrastructure investments in return. Many are questioning whether the heavy focus on Uttar Pradesh is politically motivated, especially considering UP's significant influence in national politics with its 80 lok sabha seats. As one online user noted, “Emptied rest of india & invested in UP. Reason is simple, UP has 80 mp seats,” highlighting the perception that central investment decisions are being driven by electoral calculations rather than equitable development.
This growing perception of regional imbalance poses a larger question about federal equity in India. While no state should be denied development, the concentration of high-value infrastructure projects in a single region at the perceived cost of others risks deepening regional disparities and political resentment. Transparency in the criteria for project approvals, better state-center coordination, and a more balanced distribution of resources are essential to address these concerns. In a country as diverse as india, development must not only be rapid but also inclusive, ensuring that every state, regardless of political weight, gets its fair share of national progress.
Critics point out that several southern states, such as tamil Nadu, Karnataka, and Kerala, along with western states like maharashtra and Gujarat, are among the highest tax contributors to the central pool. Yet, they argue, these regions do not receive proportionate infrastructure investments in return. Many are questioning whether the heavy focus on Uttar Pradesh is politically motivated, especially considering UP's significant influence in national politics with its 80 lok sabha seats. As one online user noted, “Emptied rest of india & invested in UP. Reason is simple, UP has 80 mp seats,” highlighting the perception that central investment decisions are being driven by electoral calculations rather than equitable development.
This growing perception of regional imbalance poses a larger question about federal equity in India. While no state should be denied development, the concentration of high-value infrastructure projects in a single region at the perceived cost of others risks deepening regional disparities and political resentment. Transparency in the criteria for project approvals, better state-center coordination, and a more balanced distribution of resources are essential to address these concerns. In a country as diverse as india, development must not only be rapid but also inclusive, ensuring that every state, regardless of political weight, gets its fair share of national progress.
click and follow Indiaherald WhatsApp channel