metro india news  I hyderabad

The Telangana government’s growing list of advisors has sparked criticism, with political circles questioning the financial burden on the state. Seven individuals have now been appointed as government advisors with cabinet rank, costing the government nearly Rs. 10 crore annually. Each advisor receives a monthly salary of Rs. 3.5 lakh, in addition to allowances and perks, while office infrastructure, two senior officials, staff, protocol, and vehicles raise the total monthly expenditure per advisor to around Rs. 10 lakh.

Until recently, the government had six advisors, but the appointment of former minister Sudarshan Reddy increased the number to seven. Additionally, MLA Premsagar Rao was appointed as Chairman of the Civil Supply Corporation and given cabinet rank, taking the total number of cabinet-rank advisors to eight. Collectively, the state spends approximately Rs. 9–10 crore annually on these positions.

The appointments have raised political eyebrows, as critics claim that these positions are being used to accommodate party seniors and leaders who could not be accommodated in the cabinet. Congress leaders had previously criticized the BR S government for similar practices, and now the trend continues under the current administration.

Among the current advisors are Vem Narendra Reddy, Jitender Reddy, Shabbir Ali, K. Keshava Rao, Harkar Venugopal, Pocharam Srinivas Reddy, Sudarshan Reddy, and Premsagar Rao. Many of these appointments were politically motivated. 

For instance, K. Keshava Rao resigned from his Rajya Sabha seat and joined Congress, subsequently being appointed as a government advisor. Pocharam Srinivas Reddy, a former BRS speaker, was given cabinet-rank advisor status after joining Congress. Similarly, Shabbir Ali, who lost the last assembly election, was given an advisor role handling minority and other community affairs.

The appointments have also raised questions about representation. While opportunities have been given to OC, BC, and minority communities, Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) have limited or no representation among the advisors, despite social demands for their inclusion.

Political observers suggest that while the advisors hold little direct power, their positions impose a significant financial burden on the state, fuelling criticism from opposition parties and community groups alike.