Yesterday, the Supreme Court set aside the Andhra Pradesh High Court order staying the investigation ordered by the Y S Jagan Mohan Reddy government into the Amaravati land scam.
The bench of Justices M R Shah and M M Sundresh said, “In our view, the high court ought not to have granted an interim stay when it was not required as the entire matter is at a premature nascent stage. The central government is yet to take a call on the letter and the consent given by the first petitioner (now appellant). It would have been better, had the high court permitted the parties to complete the pleadings, and thereafter, decided the writ petitions one way or the other by affording ample opportunity to the parties before it.”
The dispute relates to two government orders issued by the Reddy government – on June 26, 2019, appointing a cabinet sub-committee to examine the allegations of corruption against members of the erstwhile Telugu Desam Party (TDP) government and on February 21, 2020, setting up a special investigation team (SIT) to investigate the allegations.
Disagreeing, the Supreme Court said, “There may be certain other aspects which are required to be considered by the high court in the pending writ petitions, more particularly, with respect to the terms of the reference of the committee. The high court has also not considered various contentions raised before us based upon the decisions of this court on legal aspects. The fact that the first petitioner (now appellant) had made a request to the central government vide letter dated 23.03.2020 to refer the matter to the CBI followed by the consent (given by the state) given on 13.07.2020 has not been taken into consideration.”
The Court pointed out that the petitioners had filed an application before the high court to implead the Union of India and the Enforcement Directorate but this was “dismissed by a separate order dated 16.09.2020 inter alia holding that the presence of the proposed respondents was not required”.
The Supreme Court made it clear that it had not expressed anything on the merits of the case and asked it to decide and dispose of the petitions on merits and in accordance with the law, without being influenced by any of the observations made by it.
The Supreme Court also asked the high court to “make an endeavour to dispose of the writ petitions finally within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment”.
Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy