Mumbai Does Not Belong To Maharashtra, Right?

by The Big K on January 14, 2012

I’m quite sure you’ll have noticed the following screenshot but never bothered about it. Since Maharastrians chose to remain ‘outsiders’ to the world of business, they’ve almost no or say close to zero say in the matters that matter. While Mumbai is very much a part of Maharashtra, the telecom network operators don’t seem to believe so. This is what I found on AirTel’s website and then found the same on all network operators – Mumbai isn’t considered a part of Maharashtra:-

Mumbai Does Not Belong TO Maharashtra

Mumbai Is Not A Part Of Maharashtra

I personally get pissed off that the rest of Maharashtra isn’t even worth considering. Even the Marathi TV channels seem to be focused on ‘Mumbai’ than other cities in Maharashtra.

Just wondering, if Maharashtrians do not have a command over Mumbai, why not declare it as a separate state altogether? Why should it be called the ‘Capital’ of Maharashtra?

 

Email
  • http://recaptured.in/write Amit

    Why does it have to be a matter of sentiments? It’s a business/technical decision to keep Mumbai separate from rest of Maharashtra (which by the way is clubbed with Goa) while deciding telecom circles. Maybe the reason is that the population (and thus telecom user base & usage) of Mumbai is way way way high compared to the rest of Maharashtra, so it’s a separate circle so that neither Mumbai nor rest of Maharashtra becomes the other one’s burden and suffers.

  • sid

    even chennai and tamil nadu are separate. like all other cities. its something to do with circles. take it light dude

  • Parag dixit

    No i disagree, MUMBAI belongs to MAHARASHTRA only. Maharashtrian have full rights to say ‘Amchi Mumbai’.Mumbai is not a part of maharashtra this type of bloody thinking comes only in mind of those bastard outsiders because they feel jealous of having such a beautiful city in state of maharashtra