*Pensions reduced, tirumala politicised*

Tadepalli, Feb 28: YSRCP State Official Spokesperson and MLA Tatiparthi Chandrasekhar strongly criticised Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu and Minister Nara Lokesh, indulging in “adulterated politics” by dragging the sacred Tirumala laddu prasadam into controversy to divert attention from governance failures. Addressing the media at the YSRCP central office in Tadepalli, he stated that the laddu issue was a calculated political script designed to shield corruption and justify inflated ghee contracts.

At the outset, Chandrasekhar expressed deep shock over the fireworks accident at Vetlapalem in Kakinada district and conveyed condolences to the bereaved families. He demanded that the government immediately provide advanced medical treatment to the injured and announce substantial financial assistance to the families of the deceased.

Turning to pensions, he accused the coalition government of slashing welfare benefits. He stated that under Y.S. Jagan’s tenure, 66,34,372 beneficiaries received pensions as of March 2024, whereas the present government is distributing pensions to only about 60.96 lakh beneficiaries. He stated that nearly 6 lakh eligible beneficiaries have been removed after the coalition assumed office. He further questioned discrepancies in February figures, stating that pensions were sanctioned to 62,98,844 beneficiaries but disbursed to only 60,96,108 persons, asking where the difference in funds had gone. He alleged that nearly 25,000 pensions are being removed in months when public meetings are held and cited that about 22,000 pensions were cut in March alone. He criticised the government for claiming fiscal recovery while borrowing Rs 3.20 lakh crore and reducing welfare.

On the laddu controversy, Chandrasekhar stated that the issue was engineered to increase ghee rates and favour select firms. He questioned why contracts were awarded to Indapur Dairy located over 900 kilometres away despite a distance norm of 800 kilometres. He asked how ghee quality would be preserved over such long transport distances and further questioned the storage of rejected ghee tankers for two months at Vaishnavi Dairy. He alleged connections between Vaishnavi Dairy and Sangam Dairy, which he said is linked to a ruling party MLA. He questioned how Sangam Dairy secured the L-1 tender at Rs 599 per litre despite reportedly not having its own milk procurement base. He also cited that Indapur Dairy sells ghee in the open market at Rs 529 per litre and questioned pricing irregularities in bulk procurement.

He stated that three rounds of tenders were conducted in a manner that discouraged wider participation and ultimately benefited select bidders. He claimed that dairies such as Premier Dairy, AR Dairy, Sangam Dairy, Vaishnavi Dairy, Indapur Dairy, and Heritage had financial and operational linkages. He questioned why firms earlier flagged for quality issues were permitted in fresh tenders.

Chandrasekhar accused the government of avoiding a full-fledged discussion in the Legislative Council on the laddu and Indapur issues, alleging that ministers are influencing the Council Chair and that visual feeds of opposition speeches are being suppressed. He challenged the government to debate the issue openly and stated that YSRCP is ready with evidence for discussion. He also asserted that “Red Book” threats allegedly made by Lokesh would not intimidate the opposition.

He criticised what he described as “Goebbels-style propaganda,” stating that despite repeated exposure of facts, the Chief Minister continues to repeat allegations in public meetings. He accused the government of diverting attention from real public issues such as adulterated milk incidents, diarrhoea outbreaks, and financial stress.

Concluding, Chandrasekhar demanded that the government stop politicising religious institutions, apologise in the Assembly for dragging Tirumala into controversy, and respond transparently to allegations regarding pension cuts and tender irregularities. He reiterated that YSRCP is fully prepared for a structured legislative debate on the issue and challenged the government to answer in the House if it has nothing to hide.