Calling the concept of three capitals “fallacious,” BJP national spokesperson and Rajya Sabha member G.V.L. Narasimha Rao made it clear on Saturday that his party could not do anything beyond a political fight for retaining the seed capital in Amaravati because the Central government would not take decisions as per the convenience of the State party leaders.
Chief Minister Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy’s plan, which anyone could see through, was to take everything to Visakhapatnam, which would reduce Amaravati to a namesake capital for legislative functions till he got over the legal tangles, Mr. Rao observed.
What was passed in the State BJP’s core committee meeting on January 11 was only a political resolution (for continuing the capital in Amaravati), and the Central government had nothing to do with it.
“There is so far no official communication from the State government on the proposed development of three capitals,” Mr. Rao said, and insisted it did not add any economic value.
‘Wishful thinking’
In an exclusive interview to The Hindu here, Mr. Narasimha Rao said the BJP favoured Amaravati as the capital city of Andhra Pradesh as there was a political consensus at that time.
It was against shifting the capital because things had to be started all over again, and huge tracts of fertile land on the banks of the Krishna had been pooled for the construction of the much-hyped greenfield city, he said.
To expect that the Centre would intervene was nothing but wishful thinking, as it cannot intrude into the affairs of any State.
“The Central government may have the power to get into matters concerning the States. But it will intervene only when there is a constitutional breakdown, or in extreme cases. This is because there is a clear line between the Central government and the party,” Mr. Rao observed.
“There are States that challenged the authority of the Central government in deciding the citizenship of an individual though they have no say in it. Similarly, States have the right to develop their capital cities and take other policy decisions, in which the Centre cannot poke its nose. If we intervene on some pretext or the other, where will it all end?” Mr. Rao wondered, pointing out that if and when the Central government’s views were sought on the three capitals, it would state that in the constitutional scheme of things, the Centre could not meddle with the States’ policies.
