Supreme Court to hear AP bifurcation pleas

Telangana Vikas Kendrama tells court that merger of seven mandals in Khammam district with the AP is illogical

New Delhi: The Supreme Court here on Monday agreed to hear the 26 petitions filed by several leaders and NGOs against the AP Reorganisation Act 2014 and directed the court to hand over copies of Centre's reply to all the petitioners concerned.

The petitioners - former Chief Minister of united AP N Kiran Kumar Redy, former MP Vundavalli Arun Kumar, BJP leader Raghu Ramakrishnam Raju, YSRCP MP M Raja Mohan Reddy and TDP MP Rayapati Sambasiva Rao, besides Adusumilli Jayaprakash, Karnataka Telugu Sangham and Telangana Vikasa Kendra and several individuals - filed the petition in 2014 questioning the rationale behind the bifurcation of the State, as such an action lacked scientific and logical approach.

The petition was taken up by the court and issued notices to the Centre to file its counter affidavit. The Centre's replay reportedly reached the apex court almost a year later and there was no further hearing of the same. The Centre had contended that the bifurcation was in order and fulfilling all Constitutional provisions.

There was no irregularity whatsoever and also no unscientific method was adopted. The petitioners, who urged the apex court to ensure that such a wrong would never repeat at all continued to approach the court.

Meanwhile, after nearly two-and-half years, the petitions came up for hearing with the Chief Justice Bench. The bench headed by the Chief Justice J S Keher and Justice Y V Chandrachud remarked whether it was necessary to hear the case now at all as the bifurcation process was complete and the two States were on their own.

Senior Counsel A D N Rao, arguing on behalf of Kiran Kumar Reddy, contended that there was every need to scrutinise all the issues involved as the Bill was adopted by switching off the power supply to Parliament and in the dark amid confusion.

Whether the Bill was really approved as for the provisions itself was in doubt and a clarification must be elicited from the Secretary General of Parliament.

The counsel, representing the BJP leader, said the Centre had not replied to the apex court directive at all and hence it should be redirected to file its affidavit again.

Representing the Telangana Vikasa Kendram, senior counsel, Niroop, argued that merging the seven mandals of Khammam with AP through an ordinance was illogical as the people of the mandals voted for a party and elected their representatives in Telangana State while they were with the neighbouring State now.

Additional Solicitor General, Paramjeet Patwal, told the court that the Centre did so only after a full study of the situation and all aspects before bifurcation.

The Bench declared it would hear all the petitions bunching them together at a later date but did not specify when it would be.