Hyderabad: The counsel representing the AP High Court Sadhana Samiti on Friday submitted before the Hyderabad High Court that the Chief Justice is competent to decide in consultation with the Governor the location of the principal bench of the AP High Court and recommend it to the President.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta and Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar was concluding the hearing on a petition by T. Dhangopal Rao, a practicing advocate of the High Court, seeking creation of separate High Courts for AP and Telangana.
Mr M.V. Raja Ram, Samiti’s counsel, referring to the bench’s query on Thursday regarding conflict between the AP Reorganisation Act 1956 and the Reorganisation Act 2014, said there was no conflict in the Acts.
He said in the Act 1956, the power of notifying the place of the High Court was given to the Governor and in the Act 2014, the power was entrusted to the President. He made it clear that till the notification of the principal bench of the High Court neither the CJI nor the Centre have any role in the matter.
Replying to a question from the bench, Mr Raja Ram said as per provisions of both the Acts, the Chief Justice of the common High Court for both the states has the power to decide the location of the principal bench of the HC of AP, but it should be within the state of AP.
Gandra Mohana Rao, a HC advocate, who was allowed by the bench as a party to the plea, submitted that as long as Hyderabad is the common capital for both the states, the territory of Hyderabad can be considered notionally as AP territory for establishing the legislative, executive and Assembly wings of the state, including the AP HC.
He urged the bench that in the present case since the Centre didn’t take a decision regarding the setting up of the HC for AP and no notification has been issued, the bench cannot debate and decide whether the AP HC can be established in Hyderabad or not. He asked the bench to issue a direction to the Centre to take action on constituting a separate HC for AP as per the terms of Article 214 of the Constitution.
Reserving the judgement, the bench permitted the counsel, amici curiae and advocate generals of both the states to submit written arguments by Wednesday.
