The recent cabinet expansion in Telangana displays an uncomfortable yet recurring pattern in our politics — the exclusion of Muslims from the executive domain, even by those who profess the ideals of social justice, inclusion, and secularism. The Congress government has made the cabinet expansion a corrective exercise, addressing historical imbalances by inducting leaders from the Scheduled Castes and Other Backward Classes. Yet, not a single Muslim representative got a cabinet berth. No matter how strategic or circumstantial it might be, this omission demands deeper scrutiny.
Muslims comprise nearly 13 per cent of the state’s population. From Hyderabad’s old quarters to the lanes of Nizamabad, Mahbubnagar, and Adilabad, the Muslim community is deeply embedded in the fabric of the state’s urban economy, cultural life, educational landscape, and civic engagement. And yet, when it comes to the higher-ups of governance, Muslims are mostly invisible. Why are Muslims, despite their demographic weight and active civic presence, rarely viewed as legitimate stakeholders in the political power structure?
In Telangana politics, the total absence or lack of presence of Muslims in the power positions has been a recurring factor. During the TRS (now BRS) regimes from 2014 to 2023, there were only eight Muslim legislators in the 119-member Assembly — seven from the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) and only one from the TRS. This limited numerical presence certainly restricted the community’s bargaining power within the ruling party. Still, the TRS leadership accommodated a Muslim voice — Mahmood Ali — by nominating him through the Legislative Council. He was entrusted with portfolios such as Revenue and Home. While symbolic, this move indicated that constitutional mechanisms could be creatively used to ensure representation even when direct electoral entry was limited.
In stark contrast, the Congress-led dispensation today appears either disinterested or indifferent to even tokenistic inclusion. The absence of elected Muslim MLAs shouldn’t serve as a justification for their complete erasure from the cabinet. The Congress still has the option to use the Legislative Council route to nominate a competent Muslim leader. That this path has not even been considered suggests something more than mere oversight; it points toward a lack of intent and commitment. Is this merely political pragmatism, or is it a quiet but deliberate erasure, driven by deeper unease about accommodating Muslims? Is it fear of right-wing backlash that has made inclusion of Muslims, even by the secular parties, an electoral liability? If symbolic representation is even compromised, what is left of the constitutional promise of inclusion?
The Congress party is often regarded as the last bulwark against the tide of majoritarianism. But increasingly, its practices echo the very forces it claims to resist. While caste-based representation is paraded as progress, religion-based exclusion is normalised. Is it a vision of social justice, or merely a political convenience?
The Telangana cabinet reshuffle forces us to confront a troubling reality: The rise of a new model of social justice that is inclusive in optics but exclusionary in substance. Undoubtedly, the inclusion of marginalised Dalit sub-castes like Madigas and Malas, as well as diverse OBC communities, into the cabinet marks progress. But when Muslims, many of whom are part of the BC-E category and share similar socioeconomic vulnerabilities, are left out entirely, this is neither inclusion nor structural justice. It is selective accommodation. It reduces social justice from a moral imperative to a tactical arithmetic aimed at appeasing dominant narratives. Worse still is how such exclusion is slowly being normalised in the political mainstream.
The argument that Muslims can be compensated with positions on minority commissions or cultural boards is no longer tenable. These are peripheral roles with minimal policy leverage. Real power resides in cabinet portfolios, budgetary decisions, and departmental direction. Exclusion of the second largest community group from these power positions cultivates a political culture where Muslims are expected to be loyal campaigners, festive participants, and background supporters — but not leaders.
The silence of the All India Congress Committee (AICC) is also shocking. There has been no reprimand of the state unit, no public acknowledgement of the exclusion, and certainly no course correction. What message does this send to Muslims elsewhere in India, who seem to still consider Congress as a secular alternative to the BJP? The Congress still has time to reverse this message. Inclusion of a Muslim leader in the cabinet through the legislative council route would show that Indian secularism is not just about tolerance, it is about participation.
Social justice that excludes Muslims isn’t social justice at all — it’s a number game masquerading as equity. And no arithmetic built on exclusion can ever become an example for the nation — it can only serve as a cautionary tale.
The writer teaches Political Science at Maulana Azad National Urdu University, Hyderabad
