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.)

The Rome-Delhi Courtship

India and Italy are rediscovering each other as partners in a more fractured, multipolar world

Diplomacy often advances through the steady accumulation of modest alignments. The recent warming of relations between Narendra Modi’s India and Giorgia Meloni’s Italy suggests just such an incremental and pragmatic shift, one that is shaped by the pressures of a changing geopolitical order. An unremarkable bilateral relationship is now being recast as a partnership spanning defence, technology and maritime security.


Global Ambitions

Italy’s renewed outward gaze is central to this evolution. Long seen as a bridge between Europe, North Africa and the Middle East, Rome is reasserting itself as a Mediterranean power with global ambitions. Under Meloni, Italy has sought to balance its role as a founding member of the European Union with a more assertive foreign policy beyond the continent. Its recalibration includes deeper engagement with Asian partners, notably India and Japan, reflecting a recognition that economic dynamism and strategic weight are shifting eastwards.


India, for its part, has been receptive. Its own foreign policy has grown more expansive, driven by economic ambition and security concerns. A closer relationship with Italy offers both symbolism and substance: access to European technology, a foothold in Mediterranean geopolitics and a partner that shares its unease about overdependence on any single global power.


The trips by Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani and Defence Minister Guido Crosetto to India last month underscored a new seriousness. Agreements signed during these visits span defence cooperation, industrial partnerships and scientific exchange. The launch of an India–Italy Business, Science and Technology Forum signals an effort to anchor political goodwill in commercial reality.


Defence Ties

Nowhere is the shift more evident than in defence. On April 30, the two countries agreed to a bilateral military cooperation plan for 2026–27, laying out a roadmap for joint exercises, training programmes and closer institutional ties between their armed forces. Such initiatives mark a departure from the past.


With India pursuing co-production in defence under its Atmanirbhar Bharat (self-reliance) initiative, seeking to reduce dependence on imports while acquiring advanced technologies, Italy, with its sophisticated defence manufacturing base, is an attractive partner. Collaboration in aerospace, naval systems and advanced engineering offers mutual benefits by which India gains capabilities and Italy gains market access and strategic relevance in Asia.


There is a geopolitical subtext here. India remains wary of Pakistan’s role in regional instability and has quietly urged European partners, including Italy, to exercise caution in sensitive technological transfers. At the same time, both India and Italy share concerns about terrorism and have emphasised intelligence-sharing and coordinated responses as part of their expanding security dialogue.


Maritime security provides another arena for convergence. Italy’s interests are anchored in the Mediterranean, while India’s extend across the Indo-Pacific. Yet the two theatres are increasingly interconnected, linked by trade routes, energy flows and strategic competition. Discussions between the two sides have highlighted the importance of safeguarding sea lanes, enhancing information-sharing and coordinating responses to emerging threats. For Italy, engagement with India offers a presence in the Indo-Pacific.


Economic ties, though still modest, are poised for growth. Both countries see opportunities in sectors ranging from renewable energy and infrastructure to artificial intelligence and semiconductors. Academic collaboration is also expanding, with universities exploring joint research projects and student exchanges. Tourism, often overlooked in strategic discourse, may yet prove a useful lubricant, fostering cultural familiarity alongside commercial ties.


That said, this burgeoning partnership should not be overstated. Trade volumes remain limited compared with India’s exchanges with larger European economies such as Germany or France. Nor is Italy likely to displace India’s more established defence partners in the near term. The relationship is best understood as complementary rather than transformative.


Still, its significance lies in what it represents. In a world marked by intensifying rivalry between America and China, middle powers are seeking greater autonomy and flexibility. India and Italy, despite their differences in scale and geography, share an interest in a multipolar order in which influence is more widely distributed and partnerships are more fluid.


The prospect of a visit by Modi to Italy later this year may provide further impetus. For now, the Indo-Italian rapprochement reflects a broader truth about contemporary geopolitics: that distance is no longer a barrier to cooperation, and that unlikely partnerships can emerge when strategic needs align. The Mediterranean and the Indo-Pacific may be far apart on the map, but in the calculations of modern statecraft, they are drawing closer.


(The writer is a foreign affairs expert. Views personal.)

Comments

bottom of page