TNN | Oct 5, 2013, 06.27 AM IST
HYDERABAD: Stating that Article 371(D) was inserted in the Constitution to do justice to the people living in various zones of the state when AP was formed in 1956, a public interest litigation was filed in the AP high court on Friday urging it to direct the central government not to initiate any further action in pursuance of Article 3 of the Constitution for bifurcation of the state. The Centre has no power to invoke Article 3 when it was made clear that regional injustices could be set right through Article 371(D), contended petitioner PV Krishnaiah, an advocate practicing in the high court. In his petition, Krishnaiah urged the court to direct the authorities concerned against forming the new state of Telangana in pursuance of the decision taken by the Union cabinet on October 3
. He submitted that AP was formed in 1956 by having the 32nd Constitutional amendment wherein Article 371(D) was inserted, giving the impression that the issue was settled permanently. Therefore, the government does not have any power under Article 3 of the Constitution to bifurcate the state again until and unless the special Constitutional provision is deleted, the petitioner contended. He also wanted the court to direct the non-official respondents not to undertake any agitation, bandhs etc. for bifurcation of the state or opposing the same, including the ongoing strike of the APNGOs
. tnnUnion cabinet secretary, secretary to ministry of home affairs, state chief secretary, presidents of the CWC, UPA, TRS, TDP, BJP, YSR Congress, CPI, Telangana political JAC, TNGOs and APNGOs were named as the respondents.
He urged the division bench comprising Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta and Justice KC Bhanu to take up the matter. The bench said it would hear the petition on Monday.
Order on Vijay Sai's bail plea reserved to Oct 8
Hyderabad: Principal special judge U Durga Prasad Rao of the CBI court on Friday reserved to October 8 his orders on the bail plea of V Vijay Sai Reddy, the accused auditor in the Jagan assets case. CBI counsel K Surender argued that Vijay Sai Reddy was the brain behind the illegal flow of bribes into Jagan's firms in the guise of investments from various beneficiaries of YSR regime and opposed his bail plea. Sushil Kumar, counsel for the auditor, contended that his client never tried to influence the witnesses in the last two years.
HYDERABAD: Stating that Article 371(D) was inserted in the Constitution to do justice to the people living in various zones of the state when AP was formed in 1956, a public interest litigation was filed in the AP high court on Friday urging it to direct the central government not to initiate any further action in pursuance of Article 3 of the Constitution for bifurcation of the state. The Centre has no power to invoke Article 3 when it was made clear that regional injustices could be set right through Article 371(D), contended petitioner PV Krishnaiah, an advocate practicing in the high court. In his petition, Krishnaiah urged the court to direct the authorities concerned against forming the new state of Telangana in pursuance of the decision taken by the Union cabinet on October 3
. He submitted that AP was formed in 1956 by having the 32nd Constitutional amendment wherein Article 371(D) was inserted, giving the impression that the issue was settled permanently. Therefore, the government does not have any power under Article 3 of the Constitution to bifurcate the state again until and unless the special Constitutional provision is deleted, the petitioner contended. He also wanted the court to direct the non-official respondents not to undertake any agitation, bandhs etc. for bifurcation of the state or opposing the same, including the ongoing strike of the APNGOs
. tnnUnion cabinet secretary, secretary to ministry of home affairs, state chief secretary, presidents of the CWC, UPA, TRS, TDP, BJP, YSR Congress, CPI, Telangana political JAC, TNGOs and APNGOs were named as the respondents.
He urged the division bench comprising Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta and Justice KC Bhanu to take up the matter. The bench said it would hear the petition on Monday.
Order on Vijay Sai's bail plea reserved to Oct 8
Hyderabad: Principal special judge U Durga Prasad Rao of the CBI court on Friday reserved to October 8 his orders on the bail plea of V Vijay Sai Reddy, the accused auditor in the Jagan assets case. CBI counsel K Surender argued that Vijay Sai Reddy was the brain behind the illegal flow of bribes into Jagan's firms in the guise of investments from various beneficiaries of YSR regime and opposed his bail plea. Sushil Kumar, counsel for the auditor, contended that his client never tried to influence the witnesses in the last two years.
Source: The Times of India
No comments:
Post a Comment