-Galla S Kiran Kumar,Bureau Chief Telagana (Andhra Pradesh)
The hearing on the petitions filed by the state government in the Supreme Court challenging the ruling of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in March last year that the present AP Legislative Assembly does not have the power to legislate on the state capital under the Partition Act, has been adjourned to July 11.
Supreme Court today adjourned the state government’s plea for an earlier hearing
to July 11
– Delhi
The hearing on the petitions filed by the state government in the Supreme Court challenging the ruling of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in March last year that the present AP Legislative Assembly does not have the power to legislate on the state capital under the Partition Act, has been adjourned to July 11. Due to this verdict, the state government’s hands were tied in not being able to take a decision on the capitals, and the Supreme Court bench rejected the plea of the lawyers for the government to stay. Justice KM Joseph, who took up the hearing on Tuesday, said that since he is retiring on June 17, he will not have enough time to hear long arguments in this case and write a verdict. The case, which was ranked 10th in Tuesday’s causelist, did not come up before the trial court. Before this, the trial of the cases went on for a long time. Finally, former Attorney General KK Venugopal, who appeared on behalf of the state government, mentioned this case. He asked to assign dates for the investigation. On that occasion, Justice Joseph responded and reminded that there is a vacation from May 19. Venugopal appealed to take it on May 11. Justice Joseph replied, ‘I am going to retire on June 17. It is not possible to work so fast’, he commented.
Later, another senior lawyer and member of Rajya Sabha, Niranjan Reddy, on behalf of the AP government, argued that the issues of the High Court judgment had been partially stayed in the past, but now the entire state is worried about the capital. Justice BV Nagaratna intervened and asked how many hours you need to complete the arguments, Niranjan Reddy replied that they will complete it in one day. Justice Joseph asked how you can control the arguments of others. At that time, KK Venugopal intervened and said, ‘The state government has withdrawn those laws against which cases were filed in the High Court. Although there was no need for an investigation, the High Court ruled that the state government may pass similar laws in the future. If the government passes such a law in future, it will be valid. Here the High Court said that the government cannot do this by crossing the line of separation of powers. This is entirely beyond the purview of the court. One hour is enough to hear our arguments as it is only an academic matter,” he told the bench. He sought to reverse the judgment given on the invalid law. Then Justice Nagaratna responded and asked whether the inquiry could be conducted on April 11. Venugopal said that they would take only an hour for the arguments. Justice Joseph said that there were 13 cases before this day, all of them were important, this would be the 14th case, and we have to imagine what will happen. Then Niranjan Reddy intervened and asked to take up the first case on April 18. He reminded that till now it will be taken up as top of the board. Advocate Unnam Muralidhar argued on behalf of the defendants and said that out of the five defendants represented by them, three have already passed away. The state government should file a suitable application and give notices to their heirs. Niranjan Reddy replied to the court that they have just come to know about the matter and will file an application. Later, Muralidhar intervened and said that there are 256 defendants in the case and requested that notices be given to all. After listening to everyone’s arguments, Justice Joseph responded and said that this is the first case to be heard on July 11 and that is the only good thing they can do. On behalf of the state government, KK Venugopal intervened and said that the government’s hands were tied due to the AP High Court verdict, and therefore requested a stay on this. At least the stay petition was requested to be taken up for hearing.
Impatience with AP Govt
While the bench was hearing other cases on Tuesday, at 2.40 pm another senior lawyer Naphade came before the bench along with senior advocate Niranjan Reddy on behalf of the AP government and mentioned the Amaravati case. Justice Joseph reminded that they are hearing other cases. Keeping that in mind, Naphade requested the next hearing date for the Amaravati case. Justice Joseph expressed some impatience on that. “Don’t interfere while we are hearing the case. Supreme Court has a procedure. Here we are dealing with a partially heard case so far. I think there is no need to tell people like you about this,” he said. The lawyers of the state government were shocked.
