Supreme Court said that Andhra Pradesh High Court cannot be a ‘town planner’ or an ‘engineer’ or direct the government to come up with a city in six months.
New Delhi ,UPDATED: Nov 28, 2022 18:23 IST
By Aneesha Mathur: The Supreme Court has sought a response from farmers and the Centre to a plea by the Andhra Pradesh government challenging the high court decision which said the state legislature ‘lacked competence’ to make any law for shifting, bifurcating or trifurcating the capital. The Supreme Court said that the high court cannot be a ‘town planner’ or an ‘engineer’ or direct the government to come up with a city in six months.
A division bench of Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna stayed the time-bound directions issued by Andhra Pradesh High Court, including the one that said the state would erect Amaravati capital city and the capital region within six months. During the hearing earlier today, Justice Joseph said that the prayer to develop the capital city within six months was completely vague.
ALSO READ | Why Amaravati farmers are on a long march in Andhra Pradesh
The Supreme Court sought the Centre’s response to the plea by the Andhra Pradesh government challenging the judgement of the high court. The high court’s order declared Amaravati as the only capital of the state in a bid to revive its objective to have three capitals. The court had also ordered the government and the authorities concerned to complete infrastructure works like roads, drainage, electricity and drinking water supply in the Amaravati Capital City and Region within a month.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court had passed its verdict on a batch of nearly 63 writ petitions filed by aggrieved farmers of the Amaravati Region. They initiated the action against YS Jagan Mohan Reddy-led government’s decision to convert Visakhapatnam as the Executive Capital, Kurnool as the Judiciary capital and Amaravati as the Legislative Capital of Andhra Pradesh.
ALSO READ | Amaravati should be the only capital of Andhra Pradesh, says Rahul Gandhi
The Supreme Court listed the matter for a hearing on January 31, 2023. The SC said that it needed to assess the length and would take input from farmers, their associations and their committees.
