Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
search-icon-img
  • ftr-facebook
  • ftr-instagram
  • ftr-instagram
search-icon-img
Advertisement

SC agrees to hear plea challenging Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act

New Delhi, April 10 The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a plea related to the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh in 2014. The plea contended that the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act was passed by both houses of Parliament in a...
  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
Advertisement

New Delhi, April 10

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a plea related to the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh in 2014.

The plea contended that the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act was passed by both houses of Parliament in a “controversial” manner.

Advertisement

A bench headed by Chief Justice N V Ramana was told by advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for a petitioner, that though the challenge to the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh, one of the key aspects of the petition, has become “infructuous” with the passage of time, there are other important issues which needed to be adjudicated upon.

“This case is regarding the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh. That part may have become infructuous but there are other questions which are involved regarding the bifurcation of states. Please list it some day,” he said.

Advertisement

“We will see,” the bench which also comprised Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli said on Friday.

Telangana was carved out of Andhra Pradesh through the legislation in 2014.

The Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act was passed in Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha on February 18 and 20 respectively and got the assent of the then President Pranab Mukherjee on March 1. It was published in the official gazette a day later.

Several petitions, including the one which was filed by former Andhra Pradesh chief minister Kiran Reddy, challenging the bifurcation and the “controversial manner” in which the bill was cleared in Parliament were filed in the apex court in 2014 and they are pending.

The petitioners contended that the bifurcation of the state was illegal and unconstitutional.

They had questioned the Centre’s decision to pass the bill pertaining to the bifurcation of the state in Parliament despite it being rejected by the AP state assembly.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
tlbr_img1 Home tlbr_img2 Opinion tlbr_img3 Classifieds tlbr_img4 Videos tlbr_img5 E-Paper