Andhra to stick to three Capitals plan; CM says courts can’t dictate

“Despite hurdles, we will go forward… decision on capitals in our right and responsibility,’’ he said.

“The laws we make stand for public scrutiny every five years, which is the very reason why the previous dispensation was rejected and people gave us a thumping mandate with 151 of the 175 seats in the House… courts should not be getting into our domain of making laws,” the Chief Minister said.

Reddy’s sharp comments came in response to the Andhra Pradesh High Court’s March 3 directions to his government to develop the proposed Capital city, Amaravati, as envisaged under the Capital Region Development Authority (CRDA) Act of the previous Telugu Desam Party government led by former CM Chandrababu Naidu.

The HC, which was hearing a batch of PILs filed by farmers of several villages in Guntur district, who gave their land for the Amaravati project, also directed the Reddy government to develop the plots allocated to them in lieu of their land in the next three months.

While he assured the interests of the farmers will be safeguarded, Reddy said the HC’s directions were impossible to execute and appear to “trespass” into the legislative terrain.

“We feel the limits were crossed and hence have taken up the discussion in the House,” he said, adding, “We have no disrespect towards High Court. At the same time we have to respect the Assembly… If we cannot question, there will be no meaning to Legislature. Who will make laws, the Legislature or the Judiciary, will remain a question if it is not debated.”

Spelling out the reasons why he thinks the Amaravati masterplan is not feasible, Reddy said Rs 5,000 crore had already been spent on the 25-year plan between 2016-19. The government cannot spend more than that, he said. “Capital region is only a fraction when compared to rest of the state. Our agenda is all-round development. No courts can direct impossible terms and we are exploring legal options and searching for alternative measures,’’ he said.

Reddy’s colleagues echoed his views. Finance Minister Buggana Rajendernath said: “Legislature is supreme, and courts cannot interfere in policy matter unless there is violation of fundamental rights.”

Citing Supreme Court judgments on judicial restraint and judicial activism, MLA Dharmana Prasada Rao said he found fault with the High Court’s remark that a change in government need not give rise to change in policy.

“If we cannot make or change policies why do we need elections every five years,” he said.