It has been over two-and-a-half-years since Telangana was carved out of Andhra Pradesh, and for all practical purposes, it’s now a fait accompli. As such, the Supreme Court’s decision to allow hearings on a batch of petitions filed by the crusaders against division of the State, contending that the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014, was unconstitutional, perplexed quite a few. While senior advocates termed it a routine hearing of a pending case, the petitioners believe it could lead to a landmark verdict.
There is no denying the fact that on this side of the divide, in Andhra, the drama and the alleged Constitutional impropriety involved in passing the Reorganisation Bill in Parliament by the then UPA II regime still rankle in the minds of the people. The promises made in the legislation and on the floor of the House by the then government continue to be hot political issues to this day, prominent among them being special category status to the State. Now the question before the court, however, doesn’t pertain to the assurances. In fact, the apex court did not stay the bifurcation of the State when the petitions were filed in 2014. Vundavalli Arun Kumar, one of the petitioners who was in the Congress at the time, hopes his efforts to highlight how Constitutional procedures were violated could bear fruit.
The vocal politico, who has penned a book on the story of the division of the State, is convinced that the court could lay down guidelines to prevent recurrence of such violations whenever any new State is formed in the future and points to the landmark S R Bommai vs Union of India case, which curbed the misuse of Article 356, to buttress his arguments. Whatever the merits of their case, the apex court’s decision to hold a regular hearing promises to bring closure to the historic episode, which is necessary, particularly for Andhra, to move on and not get caught up in the politics of the past.