Live
- ‘Get Set, Grow Summit 2024’ Focuses on Digital Detox for Families
- Stokes motivates his team to put in extra effort, says England pacer Potts
- From overcoming setbacks to leading India in U19 Women’s Asia Cup, Niki Prasad's amazing journey
- Driving Enterprise Security: Inside Venkata Reddy Thummala’s Leadership Journey
- Constitution debate: PM Modi hails 'Nari Shakti'; makes strong pitch for 'United Bharat’
- Abhijeet Bhardwaj: Revolutionizing Enterprise Analytics with Innovation and Expertise
- Bihar: Inquiry initiated against principal who went to buy veggies during school hours
- Press Sri Lankan Prez for release of Indian fishermen: TN Cong MP to EAM Jaishankar
- TN: DMK postpones executive meet due to heavy rains & Parliament session
- Porous silicon oxide electrodes can fix durability issues in batteries: Researchers
HC: Only state bifurcation, not country partition
Andhra Pradesh High Court: Only State Bifurcation, Not Country Partition. The High Court of Andhra Pradesh in its Thursday verdict said there will not be any violation of human rights if Andhra Pradesh state is divided.
- It’s not partition of the country
- Views of High Court Chief Justice Kalyan Sen Gupta
- Says that court can not intervene in the matter
Hyderabad: The High Court of Andhra Pradesh in its Thursday verdict said there will not be any violation of human rights if Andhra Pradesh state is divided. The honourble court opined that in case of the approval of Andhra Pradesh reorganization bill by the Parliament, it will be only the state that will be bifurcated and not the country that will be partitioned.
The honourable judge Kalyan Jyoti Sen Gupta said they can not intervene in the matter that is yet to become an act. Further, the honourable judge said it was not fair to challenge such issues in the court.
It is worth mentioning here that the honourable court opined as mentioned, considering the writ petition filed by advocate PV Krishnaiah. The honourable court which has taken up the case has raised a question to Krishnaiah why did he file a writ petition instead of a PIL. The bench asked whether it was a writ petition or PIL. If it was a writ petition, asked the honourable court to state how the bifurcation would affect his personal life.
Responding to the question, PV Krishnaiah said he originally hails from Prakasham district and has been residing in Hyderabad from 1985 to practice as an advocate in the high Court and said his personal life will be affected by the bifurcation of the state.
The honourable judge said what he has been envisaging was only sheer imagination which will not happen in reality. The honourable judge said a person who respects the constitution can stay at any place. Further, the judge said no individual rights will be affected with the state bifurcation.
Advocate PV Krishnaiah was asked to file a PIL for further inquest in the matter, after withdrawing the writ petition. Responding to the verdict given by the court, reportedly Krishnaiah raised his voice. The court viewed the matter seriously for which Krishnaiah said apologies to the court. He revoked his petition and informed the court.
