top of page

By:

Anusreeta Dutta

26 April 2026 at 1:22:24 pm

One Maharashtra, Unequal Priorities

Six decades after statehood, constitutional safeguards remain necessary to bridge the gap between western Maharashtra and the regions left behind. Maharashtra is often referred to as India’s economic engine. The state, which is home to Mumbai’s financial ecosystem and Pune’s industrial corridor, contributes about 14 percent to the GDP of India. There is a long-standing dispute behind this achievement that has affected state politics for decades. Is every district in Maharashtra thriving at...

One Maharashtra, Unequal Priorities

Six decades after statehood, constitutional safeguards remain necessary to bridge the gap between western Maharashtra and the regions left behind. Maharashtra is often referred to as India’s economic engine. The state, which is home to Mumbai’s financial ecosystem and Pune’s industrial corridor, contributes about 14 percent to the GDP of India. There is a long-standing dispute behind this achievement that has affected state politics for decades. Is every district in Maharashtra thriving at the same pace? It is not just a political question. It is written into the Constitution proper. Unlike most states in India, Maharashtra has a unique constitutional provision under Article 371(2) which empowers the Governor to ensure that development funding and opportunities are equally shared between Vidarbha, Marathwada and the rest of Maharashtra. The clause was born out of fears that some areas would be forgotten once the state was established in 1960. Six decades later, the existence of this constitutional safeguard raises an uncomfortable question: why does Maharashtra need tools to balance regional development still? Regional Disparity The seeds of regional disparity were sown long before the birth of Maharashtra. Western Maharashtra had early investments in irrigation, cooperative sugar mills, educational institutions and transportation. The centres of industrial growth followed by agricultural commercialisation were Pune, Satara, Sangli, Kolhapur and part of Nashik. Vidarbha and Marathwada chose the other. Agriculture was still heavily dependent on monsoon rains, industrialization was slow and irrigation coverage was less than the state averages. Regional studies in Maharashtra have repeatedly shown that irrigation intensity and agricultural yield are higher in western districts than in much of eastern Maharashtra. These differences subsequently led to calls for institutional safeguards. In contrast, in western Maharashtra, government moves are increasingly geared towards growth, not deficit reduction. The region’s success is built on industrial corridors, logistics infrastructure, urban mobility projects and advanced manufacturing clusters. Pune has emerged as a hub for vehicles, computer technology, defence production and startups. Mumbai remains a major draw for investment in metro rail networks, coastal roadways, financial services infrastructure and international business zones. Agricultural practices in western Maharashtra are in a relatively advanced stage of development. Irrigation coverage is much better than many districts in the east, so the authorities can concentrate on raising productivity, export-oriented, value-added farming and agro-processing industries. Western Maharashtra’s policy, in a nutshell, is to make competitive regions more competitive. Eastern Maharashtra is very different. Here, the Governments have not only focused on accelerating growth but also on reducing the backlog of development. The main policy question is irrigation. For many decades official studies have consistently identified irrigation as the most important factor for regional disparities. Even with dedicated funds, the backlog of irrigation in Vidarbha and Marathwada kept growing, requiring repeated interventions by successive governments. To tackle this, region-specific irrigation corporations, such as Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation (VIDC) and Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corporation (GMIDC) were established with a specific mandate to speed up water infrastructure projects. The Union Government has sanctioned a special irrigation package for Vidarbha, Marathwada and draught prone areas of Maharashtra, with an objective to increase irrigation potential and improve water security of the farmers. Even today, a lot of public money is spent on irrigation projects in eastern Maharashtra. Government affidavits and parliamentary replies say crores of rupees are spent every year to make up for irrigation shortfalls and to finish long-pending projects. This emphasis reflects an important reality: while the western part of Maharashtra talks about competitiveness, the eastern part of Maharashtra continues to debate water access. Another area where there are divergent approaches is industrial policy. Market forces have played a major role in the industrial expansion of western Maharashtra, a process assisted by the existing infrastructure and urbanization. In contrast, Eastern Maharashtra has frequently depended on state-led interventions to draw investment to lagging regions. Projects such as the Multi-modal International Cargo Hub and Airport at Nagpur (MIHAN), logistics corridors, special industrial incentives and infrastructure subsidies were to divert industrial expansion away from the Mumbai-Pune region. Likewise, recent government announcements have earmarked Vidarbha to become a future hub for solar energy, semiconductors, aerospace manufacturing and logistics, with Marathwada being pitched for electric vehicle and electronics investments. Whereas in western Maharashtra, the policy tends to buttress pre-existing advantages, in eastern Maharashtra the industrial policy aims to generate such advantages from the beginning. Regional Equilibrium These divisions have persisted, leading to separate institutions of governance. Vidarbha and Marathwada have statutory development boards to monitor regional imbalances and recommend corrective actions. Their emergence is an indication of a broader acceptance that market forces alone have not been adequate to promote balanced growth in Maharashtra. The second capital of Maharashtra is also Nagpur. The same ideology. The state legislature meets every winter in eastern Maharashtra to ensure that the issues concerning the region remain in the political focus. The issues discussed generally are irrigation, agriculture, tribal welfare and regional development in these sessions. The controversy over regional equity, however, is still unresolved. According to critics, despite decades of special packages and focused strategies, many irrigation projects continue to face delays, cost overruns and implementation problems. Several big projects in Vidarbha remain incomplete despite years of cash pledges. There is now a growing body of policy thinking that suggests that Maharashtra may have to give up the very terminology of backlog elimination. In its own discussion on balanced regional development, the state attaches more importance to reforms in governance, diversification of the economy and speeding up growth, than to compensatory spending. The challenge is not just building canals and roadways anymore but building lasting economic ecosystems that can hold on to talent, draw investment and create jobs beyond the traditional Mumbai-Pune boom corridor. The real test for Maharashtra will be whether future policies can turn Vidarbha and Marathwada from regions requiring special support to regions capable of driving growth on their own. Till then Maharashtra’s development story will be two stories. (The author is a columnist and climate researcher with experience in political research analysis and energy policy. Views personal.)

Designing for AI Without Chasing It

Over the last three weeks, we’ve tried to take the noise out of the AI conversation.

Week 1: AI isn’t a cure. It’s a diagnostic.

Week 2: AI breaks first where work is unclear.

Week 3: AI only creates leverage when the right conditions exist.


Now comes the real question:

How do you design for AI without turning your business into a lab?

Here’s a simpler way to think about it.


Stop thinking of AI as a tool. Think of it as a new hire.


When you hire a smart person, you don’t throw them into the business and hope they “figure it out”.


You give them:

  • a role

  • boundaries

  • access

  • supervision

  • rhythm


Most SMEs are doing the opposite with AI. They buy a tool, share logins, and feel surprised when:

  • responses sound polished but don’t match reality

  • customers get updates operations can’t fulfil

  • teams quietly bypass the system to protect themselves


That’s not AI failing. That’s poor onboarding. AI doesn’t need motivation. But it still needs a seat in your operating system.

The Mistake

The pattern we’re seeing is predictable. A leader introduces AI for relief. The team uses it for drafts and summaries. Then someone lets it touch real commitments … pricing, timelines, approvals. And stress follows. Not because teams fear AI. Because they fear being blamed for AI’s output.


When process clarity, input ownership, and decision rights are fuzzy, AI feels unsafe. So people hedge. Double-check. Keep the old system alive in parallel. So, the real question isn’t “How do we adopt AI?”


It’s: How do we create a structured place where AI can help without creating chaos?


The sequence

If you remember one line from this series, let it be this:

Capability → Automation → Intelligence.

Not as a lecture. As protection.

You don’t want AI to become a second operating system running on guesses.

Here’s what good sequencing looks like.


Step 1: Build one “AI lane”

Don’t launch AI everywhere. Pick one lane of work where:

  • the process is repeatable

  • errors are visible

  • ownership is clear

For example:

  • enquiry → quote → order confirmation

  • vendor purchase → invoice approval

  • support ticket → resolution

Choose one.

This isn’t about “starting small”. It’s about learning safely.

 

Step 2: Give AI a job description

A simple rule works:

AI can draft. Humans decide.

AI can:

  • draft replies

  • summarise calls

  • create first versions

AI should not:

  • commit delivery dates

  • approve payments

  • override pricing

The moment AI starts “deciding” in a system where decision rights are unclear, confusion follows. When boundaries are explicit, resistance drops. People feel protected.


Step 3: Define only the data that truly matters

Data discipline doesn’t mean cleaning everything. It means defining what must be correct for that one lane. If you’re using AI in order fulfilment, then ensure:

  • one customer master

  • one SKU naming rule

  • one pricing logic

  • one rule for promised dates

That’s it. You don’t need perfect data. You need owned critical data. Without it, AI becomes a confident guesser.


Step 4: Install a review rhythm

This is what separates experimentation from leverage. If you introduce AI and never review its use, two things happen:

  • small mistakes compound

  • trust erodes quietly

Instead, create a simple rhythm:

Once a week, review 5–10 AI-assisted cases.

Where did it help?

Where did it mislead?

What input was missing?

Adjust the process. When this rhythm exists, AI improves with the business instead of drifting away from it.


What to Fix

You don’t need a grand AI roadmap. Set one clear objective: Make one lane of your business legible.

Legible means:

  • the work has a defined shape

  • inputs have an owner

  • decisions have boundaries

  • reviews happen on time

Once work is legible, AI becomes useful naturally. Not because you chased it. Because it finally has something stable to sit on.


A Calm Close

Chasing AI creates short bursts of excitement and long-term fatigue. Designing for AI creates quiet confidence. The difference isn’t technology. It’s sequence. So instead of asking, “Which AI tool should we adopt next?” ask: Where in our business are we ready to multiply clarity? Because AI will multiply whatever you give it. Make sure it’s something worth multiplying.


(The writer is the CEO of PPS Consulting and quite passionate about helping SMEs make the right decisions and not costly ones. She can be reached at rashmi@ppsconsulting.biz)

 

Comments

bottom of page