The YSRCP government’s multiple advisors are raising lots of questions on different public issues including the controversy-ridden two Bills relating to the Capital shifting. A latest question was asked by Sajjala Ramakrishna Reddy, Chief Minister’s Advisor (Public Affairs), on whether the previous TDP regime took approval of the President of India or not for the construction of Amaravati. It has created a political storm. The Advisor was oblivious of the fact that Amaravati was identified and developed as per the AP Reorganisation Act, 2014, which was passed with the express consent and approval of the President at that time.
TDP former Minister Yanamala Ramakrishnudu reminded the Government’s Advisor once again of how the Central Government formed the Experts Committee that recommended Capital for residual Andhra Pradesh in the region of Amaravati which is located in between the two cities of Vijayawada and Guntur. Based on this Experts Committee’s recommendation alone, Amaravati was finalised as Capital. Hence, it would require again the signature of the President and the approval of the Central Government for shifting Capital from its present location.
Mr. Ramakrishnudu, also TDP Floor Leader in Council, said that the President’s signature was required for any law made by the State Government if it violated an Act already being implemented by the Centre. The Section 5 (2) and Sub Section (1) in the Reorganisation Act clearly mentioned development of ‘a Capital’ but not 3 or multiple Capitals for AP. Whereas, Section 6 led to appointment of the Experts Committee for identifying ‘a Capital’. The CM’s Advisors should keenly study all these laws and sections so as to get clarity. Only then, they would be able to give proper and constructive advice to the State government.
Asking the Advisors to follow the bifurcation Act carefully, the TDP ex Minister said the AP Capital issue was inseparably interlinked with the Parliament Act. The TDP was only strongly objecting to the attempts by the ruling YSRCP to bring a different law through the backdoor. The State would have to mandatorily take the President’s consent for any law that it was trying to make in violation of a previous law passed by the Parliament.
Mr. Ramakrishnudu asserted that the two Bills brought by YCP were pending with the Select Committee in the Legislative Council. The AP Government Advocate General has already informed this to the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. From this, it was clear that the YSRCP regime adopted dual standards by taking the two bills for approval of the Governor while it already told the Court that the bills in question were with the Select Committee. This was nothing but proof of the AP government’s yet another irresponsible action in contempt of the High Court.
The TDP leader slammed the AP government for ‘violating’ the Constitution and democratic traditions by adamantly ignoring the laws approved by the President. Considering the rising public opinion against the government’s actions, the YSRCP rule should at least start respecting the President, Courts and the Parliament. It should say goodbye to its unilateral and unlawful activities with regard to the Capital issue and behave in a constructive way.
