Andhra Pradesh government approaches Supreme Court on 3-capitals issue 6 months after HC verdict

“Our government’s stated commitment to the people is the decentralisation of governance, and the trifurcation of capitals is one of the milestones in pursuit of that commitment. The filing of the SLP by the state is another remedy in law being sought by the state to enable further progress in its resolve,” said a top official from the state government.

In the petition, the government said that if a state, re-organised in pursuance of Central legislation under Articles 3 and 4 of the Constitution, was held to be without the power to reorganise its capital, it would be destructive to the federal structure of the Constitution.

“The high court held that the CRDA Act is legislation made by the state under Article 258 of the Constitution, meaning that the state legislated the said Act as a delegate of the Union of India,” said the petition.

“When the CRDA Act was legislated in 2014, the express text of the Act showed that the state exercised its powers under List II Entry 5 for constituting a local body. Neither the Union nor the state said that the CRDA legislation was a part of the delegation of the Union. In fact, the Union government filed an affidavit (saying) that the shifting of capitals was within the domain of the state,” it added.

Advised by legal experts

The Supreme Court of India. (Creative Commons)

The filing of the SLP is the next legal remedy available to the state against the high court judgement, said the aforementioned official. He added that the state had taken this recourse on the advice of experts in constitutional law.

Citing the Siva Ramakrishnan Committee appointed by the Centre to suggest a capital for Andhra Pradesh, the government said in the SLP that choosing Amaravati as the capital was contrary to the recommendations of the panel.

“Therefore, the question of law raised is: Could a decision taken by a delegate, contrary to the provisions of the Central Act, be affirmed by the High Court?” the state government is said to have asked in the SLP.

The sudden move by the state government raised many eyebrows, coming as it did just a day after Chief Minister YS Jagan Mohan Reddy reiterated his government’s commitment toward decentralisation of governance on the floor of the House on Day One of the ongoing Assembly session.

HC said government lacked legislative competence

On 3 March, a division bench of the state high court, comprising Chief Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justices M Satyanarayana Murthy and DVSS Somayajulu, delivered the judgment on a batch of petitions filed by farmers — who had parted with their land for the construction of the Amaravati capital city — opposing the Jagan government’s plan to create three new capitals for the state by scrapping the APCRDA Act.

The high court bench also observed that the AP state legislature had no legislative competence to enact any law for shifting the three organs of the state. The stay given by the high court earlier on shifting government offices from Amaravati to other parts of the state would also continue, as per the high court’s order.

“We also hold that the Legislature has no legislative competence to pass any resolution/law for a change of capital or bifurcating or trifurcating the capital city,” the court observed.

“While declaring that the AP state legislature has no legislative competence to enact any law for shifting the three organs of the state, we find it appropriate to issue continuous mandamus with,” read the operating part of the judgment.

Days after the verdict, Jagan on 24 March resolutely said in the state assembly that a decision on the capital cities was the state’s right and responsibility, while policymaking was the domain of the legislature.

He also said courts could not preempt or direct not to make a policy with presumptions and lay down impossible conditions, setting timelines that could not be met.

Ploy to push issue till polls: TDP

The main opposition in the state, the TDP, has alleged that the government was trying to push the issue till the Assembly polls that are scheduled in 2024.

The TDP has been opposing the YSRCP government’s three-capitals plan, and was batting for Amaravati as the only capital of Andhra Pradesh.

Making it clear that the high court clarified that the state government did not have the right to take a decision on the capital cities, senior TDP leader and MLA Payyavula Kesav said he felt that the ruling party was only trying to push the matter till the coming elections.

“Though the Supreme Court has allocated time to take up the Amaravati issue, the ruling party is seeking adjournments, and this clearly indicates that the YSRCP only wants to postpone the matter till the next elections,” Keshav told reporters at the party headquarters on Sunday.

Expressing hope that the Chief Justice of India would see to it that justice is done to the people of Andhra Pradesh, Kesav also demanded that the state government publish a white paper on the financial condition of the state.