This move reflects a strategic effort to secure legal permanence for Amaravati amidst a history of policy shifts and legal disputes, highlighting the delicate balance between state autonomy and the pursuit of administrative stability.
Published May 11, 2025 | 2:00 PM ⚊ Updated May 11, 2025 | 2:00 PM
Dhyana Buddha Statue in Amaravati. (Creative Commons)
Synopsis: Amending the Reorganisation Act to designate Amaravati could limit Andhra Pradesh’s future flexibility, tying its administrative framework to a parliamentary statute that is harder to modify than state legislation.
The protracted debate over Andhra Pradesh’s capital has entered a new chapter, with the state government reportedly urging the Union government to amend the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014, to designate Amaravati as the state’s sole capital.
This move reflects a strategic effort to secure legal permanence for Amaravati amidst a history of policy shifts and legal disputes, highlighting the delicate balance between state autonomy and the pursuit of administrative stability.
The Andhra Pradesh Capital Region Development Authority (APCRDA) Act, 2014, already empowers the state to declare a capital region through a notification, as outlined in Section 3. Under Article 162 of the Constitution, states possess the executive authority to designate their capital without requiring specific legislative backing from the Union government.
The Reorganisation Act, enacted to facilitate the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, primarily addressed asset division, liabilities, and transitional arrangements, including the temporary designation of Hyderabad as a shared capital.
It was not intended to permanently fix the capital of the residual state. Against this backdrop, the state’s request for an amendment raises intriguing questions about the motivations and implications of seeking central intervention when existing state mechanisms suffice.
The push to enshrine Amaravati’s status in the Reorganisation Act appears driven by multiple factors. First, Andhra Pradesh’s capital policy has been a contentious issue, marked by significant reversals.
The previous government’s proposal for a three-capital model — Amaravati as the legislative capital, Visakhapatnam as the executive capital, and Kurnool as the judicial capital — sparked widespread protests and legal challenges. The Andhra Pradesh High Court’s 2022 ruling reaffirmed Amaravati as the sole capital, declaring that the state lacked the legislative competence to trifurcate its capital functions.
The current government, led by Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu, has reaffirmed its commitment to Amaravati, with Naidu announcing in June 2024 that it would remain the state’s only capital. This volte-face underscores the need for a definitive resolution to restore public and investor confidence.
Second, while the APCRDA Act and executive powers under Article 162 provide a legal basis for designating Amaravati as the capital, embedding this decision in a central statute could offer a robust shield against future policy reversals. Amending the Reorganisation Act would require parliamentary approval, making any subsequent change a politically and procedurally complex endeavour.
This could insulate Amaravati from the volatility of state-level politics, particularly given the state’s history of alternating governments with divergent visions for the capital. The recent revival of Amaravati’s development, backed by $1.6 billion in funding from the World Bank and Asian Development Bank, further underscores the need for a stable framework to sustain long-term investments.
Third, the state’s appeal to the Union government may reflect a strategic bid to leverage the authority of a parliamentary act to enhance Amaravati’s legitimacy as a greenfield capital. The city, envisioned as a smart, sustainable urban hub, has attracted global attention, with a master plan crafted by a Singaporean consortium.
However, the project faced setbacks between 2019 and 2024, when the three-capital proposal led to the suspension of annuity payments to farmers, cancellation of pensions for landless families, and the withdrawal of key international partners like the World Bank.
The renewed focus on Amaravati, marked by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s relaunch of construction in May 2025, signals a commitment to restoring its status as an economic and administrative powerhouse. A central endorsement could bolster investor confidence and signal permanence to stakeholders.
Yet, this request raises critical questions about the boundaries of central involvement in state affairs. The designation of a capital is traditionally a state prerogative, and the APCRDA Act already provides a legal framework for this purpose. Seeking an amendment to a central act could be perceived as an overreach, potentially setting a precedent for greater Union influence over state administrative decisions.
For instance, the unique arrangement of Chandigarh as a shared capital for Punjab and Haryana was a product of specific historical and geographical constraints, not a norm for central intervention. Similarly, Hyderabad’s role as a temporary shared capital post-bifurcation was a transitional measure, not a model for permanent central oversight.
Amending the Reorganisation Act to designate Amaravati could limit Andhra Pradesh’s future flexibility, tying its administrative framework to a parliamentary statute that is harder to modify than state legislation.
Moreover, the move could have broader implications for India’s federal structure. If Parliament accedes to this request, it may open the door for other states to seek central legislation for matters within their jurisdiction, potentially eroding the autonomy enshrined in the Constitution. The Union government’s response will thus be a litmus test for balancing cooperative federalism with state sovereignty.
The plight of Amaravati’s farmers, who pooled over 33,000 acres of fertile land under the Land Pooling Scheme (LPS) in 2015, adds a human dimension to this saga. These farmers, promised developed plots and annual compensation, faced uncertainty during the three-capital controversy, leading to protests that spanned over 1,600 days.
The high court’s 2022 verdict and the current government’s reaffirmation of Amaravati as the sole capital have offered relief, but the state’s request for a central amendment reflects a broader aspiration to safeguard their contributions through an unassailable legal framework.
In conclusion, Andhra Pradesh’s request to amend the Reorganisation Act to cement Amaravati’s status as its capital is a bold attempt to resolve a decade-long conundrum. While the state already possesses the authority to designate its capital under the APCRDA Act and Article 162, the pursuit of central legislation signals a quest for enduring stability in a politically turbulent landscape.
The Union government’s response will not only shape Amaravati’s future but also define the contours of federal dynamics in India. As Andhra Pradesh navigates this complex terrain, the saga of its capital underscores the intricate interplay of law, politics, and the collective aspirations of a state striving for a secure administrative identity.
(Views are personal. Edited by Muhammed Fazil.)
