VIJAYAWADA: Citing several judgements, Minister for Finance and Legislative Affairs Buggana Rajendranath has said the court does not have the power to direct or advise the executive/legislature in matters of policy. It cannot transgress into constitutional limits of statutory powers. “Legislature is supreme in its own sphere under the Constitution and it is solely for the legislature to consider as to when and what respect or what subject matter, the laws are to be enacted,” he averred.
Addressing the State Assembly during a short discussion on ‘Decentralisation’ on Thursday, Buggana at length placed his argument before members that legislature powers are not inferior to judiciary and its responsibility lies with making policies, taking into consideration the entirety of the State, people and their needs.
On the recent High Court judgement on Amaravati, he pointed out that when the CRDA repeal Act itself was repealed, he questioned where was a need for a cause of action. Pointing out at the mention of Principle of Promissory Estoppel in the judgment, he sought to know when there is no case, where is the question of Principle of Promissory Estoppel.
“At no point of time, the government has said it would not develop plots in the capital. In fact, it is committed to developing plots,” he asserted. Reading out a point in the judgement, which said anticipating that the State would enact a law..., the minister cited a Supreme Court judgement, which stated that it is not necessary to raise hypothetical questions to drive home a point which is not of any consequences. As and when laws are made their constitution will have to be tested on their own merit. The court has said that preemptive questions should not be given of hypothetical situations.
With regard to the observation of the High Court -- “The APRA, unlike many of other Reorganisation Acts passed earlier makes a provision for the capital. This is also a distinguishing feature further fortifying the view that Parliament wanted ‘a’ capital only for the State of AP,’’ -- Buganna sought to know if an order says that Vijayawada shall have a bus station, does it mean it should only have one bus station.
Stressing that literal interpretation leads to unjust results, he cited the judgement in the National Insurance Company vs Lakshmi Das case, where it was observed that the golden rule of interpretation of statutes is that they are interpreted according to grammatical and ordinary sense of the world. It was the predominant method of reading statutes and more often than not such grammatical and literal interpretation leads to unjust results that the legislature never intended.
He cited several other Supreme Court judgements over the years to establish the fact that the judiciary cannot encroach the domain of legislature. He cited an apex court judgement which says the power of judicial review is expanded taking within its ambit the concept of social and economic justice while exercising the power of judicial review, the court does not encroach the field marked by the Constitution for legislature and executive. The court can examine the legality and validity of legislation of the governmental action and not the wisdom behind the legislative measures or rate the merit or demerit of governmental action.
He further cited another judgement, where it was said judges must exercise restraint and should not encroach the domain of executive or legislature. Under the Constitution, the legislature, executive and judiciary, all have their own sphere of operation. Ordinarily, it is not proper for any of these three organs to encroach the domain of others, otherwise delicate balance of the Constitution will be upset and there will be a reaction.
The Legislative Affairs Minister, who started his lengthy speech by reading out the Preamble of the Constitution, dwelt at length on the Directive Principles and Fundamental Rights and said it is the responsibility of the government to ensure the rights of all people and development of all regions. He said this is the very objective behind the welfare State. “It shall be the duty of the State to follow this principle both in the matter of administration and making laws,” he asserted.
Citing the views of several legal luminaries and constitutional experts, Buggana said the basic idea behind the decentralisation of development and administration is to ensure the spirit of directive principles is upheld.
During his lengthy speech, he drew a comparison of socio-economic development in different regions of Andhra Pradesh, GSDP, per capita income and said by virtue of their location North Andhra and Rayalaseema districts are at disadvantage like those born defective. He cited observations of the Srikrishna Committee to buttress his argument.
He also explained the history of the Andhra Maha Sabha and Sri Bagh Pact to drive home the point that decentralised development of AP was the avowed goal of several for more than 100 years. On the matter of the capital, he cited the report of Sivaramakrishna Committee comprising experts, which too stressed the need for decentralisation.
Earlier, former minister and Srikakulam MLA Dharmana Prasada Rao, who initiated the short discussion, said the need for the discussion become a necessity in the wake of the court observation that change of the government is not a ground to change the policy.
The YSRC MLA felt if such was the case, where was the need for the legislature in the first place. He also cited several Supreme Court judgements to drive home the point that the judiciary should not encroach the domain of the legislature, which is made of people’s representatives.
Court should not belittle legislature: Chevireddy
Chandragiri YSRC MLA Chevireddy Bhaskar Reddy said those in the position to give judgement should be more careful and conduct themselves in a way others do not point fingers at them. It is for the court to uphold the spirit of Constitution and not to engage in a fight to gain an upper hand by belittling the legislature. “When MLAs cross the line, people hold them accountable. Who is there to hold judges accountable when they cross the line,” he asked