HYDERABAD: Konathala Ramakrishna, a former minister and currently convener of Uttarandhra Charcha Vedika, on Thursday withdrew his petition filed in the High Court questioning the action of the central government in withdrawing the grant of Rs 350 crore (Rs 50 crore per district) that was released on February 9 this year for the purpose of ‘special assistance’ to Andhra Pradesh (for seven backward districts of Rayalaseema and north coastal Andhra) for 2017-18. The court permitted him to file a public interest litigation petition (PIL) instead on the same issue.
In April this year, Konathala filed the writ petition seeking direction to the Centre for restoration of the said grant to AP. Sub-section 3 of AP Reorganization Act 2014 contemplates that the Centre, while considering the special development package for the successor state of AP, should provide adequate incentives, in particular for Rayalaseema and north coastal regions of the state.
When the bill for bifurcation of united AP state was passed in February 2014, the then prime minister had made a statement in the Rajya Sabha providing special development package for the backward regions of successor state of AP, in particular for the districts of Rayalaseema and north coastal Andhra. The Act mandates that the Centre should consider the special development package to these districts and make appropriate grants to ensure special development. Accordingly, the Centre had discharged its obligation by providing the grant on February 9 this year. But, the Centre had later withdrawn the grant which was not allowed by the provisions of the Act 2014, he added.
When the matter came up for hearing on Thursday, the division bench, comprising acting chief justice Ramesh Ranganathan and justice J Uma Devi, asked the petitioner in what way he was an aggrieved party on the issue. The issue involved public interest, the bench opined. In reply, petitioner’s counsel C Raghu urged the court to permit him to withdraw the petition and to file a PIL case on the same issue. Agreeing to the plea, the bench permitted him to file a PIL on the issue.