High Court stays SIT probe into projects launched by TDP Government
- Senior TDP leader Varla Ramaiah and former MLA Alapati Rajendra Prasad file petitions in High Court stating that the present YSRCP government constituted a Cabinet Sub-Committee and the SIT only to defame the TDP
- There is no provision in the Constitution that a new government should review the decisions of the previous governments, they point out
- Ramaiah also brought to the notice of the court that the GOs issued by the YSRCP government are not in accordance with the Constitution and also the government failed to mention in the GOs as to why it is reviewing the policies and decisions of the previous government
- After hearing the arguments, Chief Justice Maheswari delivers the interim order staying the investigation by the SIT
Nelapadu (Amaravati): Chief Justice Jitendra Kumar Maheswari of the High Court on Wednesday delivered interim order staying the investigations by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) set up by the YSR Congress Party government to probe alleged irregularities into projects started by the previous TDP government between 2014 and 2019, including land acquisition in Amaravati.
It may be recalled that the YSRCP government issued GO 1411 on June 26, 2019 to set up a Cabinet Sub-Committee (CSC) to review the policies, schemes and projects of the previous TDP government. Subsequently, it issued GO 344 on February 21, 2020 forming a SIT headed by IPS officer Dr Kolli Raghuram Reddy to investigate into the irregularities found by the Cabinet Sub-Committee.
Senior TDP leader Varla Ramaiah and former MLA Alapati Rajendra Prasad in their petitions, said that the present government constituted the CSC and the SIT only to defame the TDP. They questioned as to how a government can review the policy decisions of the previous government.
Varla Ramaiah maintained that the policy decisions are taken by a government depending on the situation at that time. Contending that a government is elected by people, Ramaiah said power lies with the elected government to take a decision based on the circumstances.
There is no provision in the Constitution that a new government should review the decisions of the previous governments, he pointed out. "The people have voted the new government not to review the previous government's policies," he observed.
Ramaiah said the GOs issued by the government are not in accordance with the Constitution and maintained that the government had not mentioned in the GOs as to why it is reviewing the policies and decisions of the previous government.
The government does not have a valid reason to issue the GOs and they are against the principles of natural justice, Ramaiah pointed out. Seeking an interim stay on the implementation of the GOs till the hearing of the case is completed, Ramaiah sought for the court to quash the two GOs.
However, Advocate General Sriram Subrahmanian contended that the government has powers to review and take remedial measures on the decisions taken by the previous governments.
After hearing the arguments, Chief Justice Maheswari delivered the interim order staying the investigation by the SIT.