Tag: Andhra Pradesh High Court

  • Andhra Pradesh High Court stay order: SC reserves verdict on AP’s plea

    Express News Service

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved order in a plea by Andhra Pradesh against the High Court’s ruling of staying the YSRC government’s orders (GOs) to constitute a Cabinet Sub-Committee to scrutinise decisions taken by the previous TDP regime and form an SIT for probing the alleged irregularities, including the Amaravati land scam.

    The verdict was reserved by a bench of Justices MR Shah and MM Sundresh after hearing the submissions of senior advocate AM Singhvi for the State and senior advocate Siddhartha Dave for TDP leader.The HC on September 16 had stayed the GOs by prima facie finding that it was politically motivated and that the current government did not have the power to carte blanche review all policies propounded by the previous regime. By a separate order delivered on September 16, the HC had also refused to impleadment of the Centre and the ED as respondents even though the State had wished to involve them in the investigation of the matter.

    Terming the probe into alleged irregularities by the previous regime a ‘witch hunt’, Dave contended that taint is attached with the SIT. “They have made up their mind and they are saying that it is unbridled corruption. They are so wide that everything is coming under the sun. They choose an administrative body and not a statutory body. It is biased. Here bias is there from the Constitution itself,” Dave further added. He also said, “The State cannot do any inquiry to find out that there may have been an offence which may have been committed.”

    Considering Dave’s submission, Justice MR Shah, the presiding judge of the bench, said, “Merely because other side is political rivalry cannot be a ground for quashing, the judgment is very clear. If you are very clean, if other side is very clean, why should you worry?”

    Questioning the High Court’s act of passing a blanket order of staying GOs, Singhvi had argued that the HC had completely misguided itself by drawing an equivalence between the court’s power of judicial review and the executive’s power to investigate.He further asserted that a successor government may investigate allegations and charges against the erstwhile government and the existence of political rivalry does not vitiate any inquiries.

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved order in a plea by Andhra Pradesh against the High Court’s ruling of staying the YSRC government’s orders (GOs) to constitute a Cabinet Sub-Committee to scrutinise decisions taken by the previous TDP regime and form an SIT for probing the alleged irregularities, including the Amaravati land scam.

    The verdict was reserved by a bench of Justices MR Shah and MM Sundresh after hearing the submissions of senior advocate AM Singhvi for the State and senior advocate Siddhartha Dave for TDP leader.The HC on September 16 had stayed the GOs by prima facie finding that it was politically motivated and that the current government did not have the power to carte blanche review all policies propounded by the previous regime. By a separate order delivered on September 16, the HC had also refused to impleadment of the Centre and the ED as respondents even though the State had wished to involve them in the investigation of the matter.

    Terming the probe into alleged irregularities by the previous regime a ‘witch hunt’, Dave contended that taint is attached with the SIT. “They have made up their mind and they are saying that it is unbridled corruption. They are so wide that everything is coming under the sun. They choose an administrative body and not a statutory body. It is biased. Here bias is there from the Constitution itself,” Dave further added. He also said, “The State cannot do any inquiry to find out that there may have been an offence which may have been committed.”

    Considering Dave’s submission, Justice MR Shah, the presiding judge of the bench, said, “Merely because other side is political rivalry cannot be a ground for quashing, the judgment is very clear. If you are very clean, if other side is very clean, why should you worry?”

    Questioning the High Court’s act of passing a blanket order of staying GOs, Singhvi had argued that the HC had completely misguided itself by drawing an equivalence between the court’s power of judicial review and the executive’s power to investigate.He further asserted that a successor government may investigate allegations and charges against the erstwhile government and the existence of political rivalry does not vitiate any inquiries.

  • Andhra Pradesh HC asks Twitter why it should not be shut down

    By PTI

    AMARAVATI: The Andhra Pradesh High Court has come down heavily on social media platform Twitter for disregarding its orders on deleting objectionable content and asked to show cause why it should not be shut down over the issue.

    Stating that Twitter’s (in)action is tantamount to contempt of court, a Division Bench, comprising Chief Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice M Satyanarayana Murthy, on Monday asked why criminal proceedings could not be initiated against it.

    The Court directed Twitter to file an affidavit in this regard by the next hearing and posted the case to February 7.

    Taking a strong view, the High Court told Twitter it could not take cover behind technicalities.

    “During the last hearing, we gave clear orders that the objectionable content be removed forthwith. Failure to do so amounts to contempt of court. If you have to continue your services, you have to necessarily respect the laws of the land. Otherwise, close your shop down,” the High Court warned.

    Twitter faced the AP High Court’s ire during a regular hearing on Monday on a suo motu case related to objectionable and derogatory posts on various social media platforms against the judiciary allegedly by members and supporters of the ruling YSR Congress.

    The CBI is investigating the case at the behest of the High Court and so far arrested several persons in this connection.

    N Ashwini Kumar, advocate on behalf of the complainant the High Court Registrar General, brought to the court’s notice that though Twitter claimed to have removed the objectionable content from its platform, it could be accessed through Virtual Private Networks.

    Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, on behalf of the CBI, told the Court that the social media platform was not co-operating in deleting the derogatory content from its site.

    The Division Bench asked Twitter why criminal contempt proceedings could not be initiated against it.

    Advocate for YouTube maintained that they had fully complied with the court orders but the content posted by some television media houses on their YouTube channels was still running.

    The media houses themselves should remove such content, the YouTube advocate said.

    “We have deleted, within 36 hours, all the links listed out by the High Court Registrar General and the CBI,” he added.

  • Andhra govt for court-monitored probe into Amaravati scam

    By Express News Service
    NEW DELHI: Urging the Supreme Court to lift the stay imposed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court, the State government on Friday submitted that it is ready for a court-monitored investigation into alleged irregularities in land transactions in capital Amaravati. 

    Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for the Andhra Pradesh government, submitted that the government is agreeable to a court-monitored investigation into the land scam even by the CBI. “We agree to no coercive action against the accused. We agree to court-monitoring of the investigation. We also welcome a CBI investigation under the monitoring of the court. But let the investigation continue,” the counsel said 

    A bench comprising, Justices Ashok Bhushan and R Subhash Reddy, expressed difficulty in considering the case and slated the hearing for next week. The case pertains to the Special Investigation Team probe ordered by the Jagan Mohan Reddy government into allegations of large scale scam in the sale of lands in Amaravati region in anticipation of the establishment of new State capital there after the bifurcation of AP in 2014. 

    The FIR names several high profile individuals as accused, including former Advocate General Dammalapati Srinivas and relatives of Supreme Court Judge NV Ramana. Last year, the High Court had stayed the SIT probe acting on a petition filed by Dammalapati Srinivas. The High Court also passed a gag order against media reportage and social media discussions on the contents of the FIR. 

    The Andhra Pradesh High Court while staying the SIT probe in the ‘land scam’, had noted that “rule of law demands continuity and a new government cannot be permitted to overturn the decisions of the previous government.”

    ‘No coercive action’

    “We agree to no coercive action against the accused. We welcome a CBI probe into the land scam under the court monitoring. But let the investigation continue,” said counsel Rajeev Dhavan