The High Court of Andhra Pradesh while hearing the petitions on Amaravati and CRDA had summoned the Accountant General to submit a report on how much money has been spent on Amaravati till date and quantum of loss due to halting of construction activity in the capital region. The Court warned the AG to submit the report otherwise he will be summoned to present himself before the court and they will get the reports from the vigilance and income tax departments.
The three-judge bench of the High Court consisting Justice K. Maheshwari, Justice M. Satyanarayana, Justice S. Jayasurya heard the petitions related to the three-capitals bill and the repeal of the CRDA Act. The advocates Unnam Muralidhar Rao, Shravan Kumar, Supreme Court advocate Sudesh Gupta represented Amaravati farmers on different petitions.
Advocates for the Amaravati farmers argued that the courts cannot involve in the administrative decisions of the state but the situation here involves violation of the basic rights of the farmers. The farmers have given their precious land for the construction of the capital. Now the government is going against the agreement by not developing the capital and just returning the plots as is or giving unjust compensation. This is a violation of the contract the farmers entered into with the government of Andhra Pradesh.
Advocate Unnam Muralidhar Rao argued that the high level committee of ministers appointed by the government did not take into account the opinions of the citizens as well as the farmers. Farmers and citizens are the key stakeholders affected by this decision of the government he added. Rao stated that even the report submitted by the G.N. Rao committee, a retired IAS officer did not take into account the opinion of the farmers, who gave their farmlands for Amaravati and submitted the report only on the lines of the announcement made by the Chief Minister suggesting there may be more than one capital during the preceding assembly sessions. He even highlighted that the report of the Boston Consulting Group (BCG) was also prepared on similar lines and no government order was passed seeking a report from BCG. For which the bench replied that they will be seeking an explanation from the government on the same.