There is widespread criticism of shifting the capital region of Andhra Pradesh from Amaravati to 3 areas Amaravati, Vizag, and Kadapa.My views as a journalist.
Today on the ongoing protests in the capital region identifying the landmark precautions. This means what does the constitution of India says concerning having a shift in the capital region.
This means the outcry for justification of three capitals must be included in the portfolio documents related to the reorganizing act. This means the ordinance passed for three capitals in Andhra Pradesh is not fulfilling the concept of adhering to principles of unity and proclaimed justification. The nature of the constitution further says this. When the accumulated significant progress detects the principle outwork of justice, this leads to proclaimed offense. The nature of powerful propaganda regarding the inputs given by different Portugal consultancies is merely biased and read out the statements by judicial overview. This is not a state problem because offense conducted on the principles of justification with altered or manipulated instances leads to a pragmatic or often theoretical process of State government failure. The tenets of foundations layed in the constitution mention these points to be adhered to by intellectual disagreement.
The vile of question pending before the constitutional values say that the maintenance of trust and care of disagreement is one of the preambles under which the constitution is framed.
The constitution supplies that whether given under pretext is not to be overlooked by suggesting categories of mention. So let me say this principle on more precise terms and conditions.
Articles of constitutional validity say the incumbent government of ruling cannot degrade a particular class or more specific unity principles to become offended or proclaimed duty. This means the whereabout of significant progress is to be valid theoretically and proportionally. The case of bringing little favors to a particular region of a state based on principles violating procedures that are carried is questionable. This means the chief minister’s office is governing principles of leading the state through enigmatic and precautionary duties based on circumstantial or mollified instances of corrupt practices favorite decisions based on approval of justice and casualties that refrain from the valid trust and honesty of calendar items. I can further say the state’s reputation is based on principles of honesty and truthfulness in authoritative decisions. Biased or often retrogative to base arguments of false or pretension is to be defined as damaging policies by government intending to favor particular region based on utmost calibrated principles of justice and also a category of pre planned law forcing its behavior through planting hatred and righteousness of biased decisions to prevent or agree or favor particular region through the differential, or appropriate action is chosen from calibrated or findings of Boston group or any other committee to the propaganda of intentional misleading. This means the acceptance or failure is through carrying principles to outsmart constitutional validity based on circumstantial manipulation took through formulaic or casualties related to agreement or disagreement of relational data.
This means the forgoing battle between acceptability or indulging in the new capitals’ varsity in Andhra Pradesh is a questionable offense based on disagreements or through force full disturbance. Thanks for ascertaining the criteria incumbent rather dutiful progressive officers based on theoretical or often judgemental in the process of an ordinance passed. This means the incumbent government of Andhra Pradesh is regarded as opulence and biased to favor certain regions for the thirst of culture based on categories or propaganda of false testimonials in favor opulence to be handled or regarded as favors in the background with intentions of hard or overly ruled assets in possession. Hence as a Journalist, I can read the Constitution’s preamble based on categories of trust maintained between citizens and ruling. The reason for judging cannot be based on altered or manipulated evidence. It merely means you are forging the documents with the intention of biased and manipulative to categorically gain the pleasure of ruling through bias or supporting partial judgment. This means the case is now between forgeries document of evidence in death caused due to principles of the decision through categories.
To read further