MRPS President Manda Krishna Madiga questioned AP Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan, asking whether the Jana Sena Party represents all communities or just a select few castes. Highlighting that Jana Sena received three ministerial seats within the coalition cabinet, he acknowledged the appointments of Pawan Kalyan and Nadendla Manohar but argued that the third ministerial seat should have gone to a representative from the BC, SC, or ST communities to ensure social justice.
Krishna Madiga explained that, while he understands Nadendla Manohar’s appointment as he stood by Pawan Kalyan in difficult times, the third ministerial position should have been allocated to another community group. He emphasized that only then would it reflect Jana Sena’s commitment to inclusivity and fair representation.
He also recounted that during the last Assembly elections, MRPS requested Pawan Kalyan to allow their community a chance to contest in certain seats, including two in the former East Godavari district and one in the former Kadapa district’s Railway Kodur constituency. He expressed frustration that the request for even one SC-reserved seat went unfulfilled, as all three were given to the Mala community. Krishna Madiga mentioned his attempt to meet with Pawan Kalyan to express these grievances, but he was denied an appointment.
Frustration with Pawan Kalyan’s Leadership Approach
Krishna Madiga’s concerns, he said, are not new. If Pawan Kalyan truly wishes to be a “big brother” figure for all communities, Krishna argued, he should allocate ministerial roles to representatives from the BC, SC, or ST communities. He criticized Jana Sena for appearing to serve only the Kapu community, remarking that this narrow focus leaves others feeling unrepresented.
Response to Pawan Kalyan’s Comments on Home Ministry
Krishna Madiga also responded to Pawan Kalyan’s recent comments on Home Minister Anita’s department. He questioned whether it’s appropriate for a minister from one department to criticize another’s handling of their own portfolio. Using a hypothetical example, he pointed out how it would be improper if another minister offered to “run” Pawan’s ministry, remarking that the cabinet is meant to function as a unified family. Krishna Madiga concluded by condemning Pawan’s statements on the Home Ministry as unwarranted.