In a legal victory for the Jagan Mohan Reddy government, the Supreme Court on Wednesday set aside an Andhra Pradesh High Court order issuing a “blanket stay” on an inquiry into the Amaravati land scam and the alleged role of the previous Telugu Desam Party (TDP) regime.
The events in this case unfolded in June 2019 when the Reddy government issued a notification constituting a Cabinet sub-committee to review major policies, projects, programmes, institutions and the key administrative actions taken by the TDP government following the bifurcation of the erstwhile State of Andhra Pradesh.
The first report of the sub-committee on December 27, 2019 pointed out “several procedural, legal and financial irregularities and fraudulent transactions concerning various projects..., including in the Capital Region Development Authority region”.
On February 21, 2020, the State government issued another notification setting up a Special Investigating Team (SIT) to “inquire, register, investigate and conclude the investigation” into the findings of the report.
Both notifications were stayed by the High Court indefinitely, prompting the State to approach the top court for relief.
On Wednesday, a Supreme Court Bench headed by Justice M.R. Shah agreed with the State’s submission that the High Court had “misinterpreted and misconstrued” the two notifications issued by the government.
“If the two government notifications are considered, it cannot be said to be overturning the earlier decisions taken by the previous government and/or to review the decisions taken by the previous government. The Sub-Committee and the SIT have been constituted to inquire into the allegations of acts of corruption and misfeasance of the previous government,” Justice Shah, who authored the judgment, observed.
The Bench observed that the High Court had, while granting the interim stay, not considered the fact that the State government had already made a representation to the Centre to refer the investigation to the Central Bureau of Investigation.
The Centre, the court noted, was yet to take a call on the letter and the consent given by the State government.
Justice Shah concluded that the High Court ought not to have granted the stay on the entire probe at such a premature stage.
Setting aside the High Court order of stay, the Bench said it was not making any observations on the merits of the case. It asked the High Court to examine the matter on its merits without being influenced by any remarks in the top court judgment.
The top court said the Centre was “a proper and necessary party” to be arraigned in the High Court.
TDP leader Varla Ramaiah, the respondent before the top court, had accused the Reddy government of indulging in political vendetta. Mr. Ramaiah said the inquiry was motivated by political rivalry.
“Political rivalry alone cannot be a ground for quashing an inquiry into allegations of corruption and misuse of public office… Maybe at times only political rivalry can bring out the truth,” the Bench had observed while reserving the case for judgment.
Mr. Ramaiah had accused Chief Minister Reddy of orchestrating a roving inquiry into the TDP regime to “take revenge against people whom he holds responsible for the cases registered against him”.
The State had steadfastly maintained in the Supreme Court that the Amaravati land case was not a product of “regime revenge”.
“The entire process was extremely fair. The State was proceeding in a very, very cautious manner. The Committee report suggested major manipulations and systemic inclusion of TDP leaders into the land. SIT was constituted to look into financial irregularities... It was impossible for the high court to interfere at a pre-investigation stage,” the State government had argued.
