A bench of justices G S Singhvi and Ranjana Prakash Desai asked petitioner P V Krishnaiah to furnish details of all the three PILs filed by him on the issue so that "if necessary" they could be tagged together for appropriate consideration.
P V Krishnaiah, who is an advocate, has urged the court to restrain the Centre from taking any step for carving out a separate state and has sought that an appropriate direction be given to authorities to ensure that the general public was not inconvenienced because of the year-long agitation.
The petition stated that the power to carve out a new state under Article 3 of the Constitution is vested with Parliament and the same cannot be done without amending Article 371-D, which granted certain benefits like reservation in employment, education to the locals.
According to the petitioner, apart from normal life being paralysed, courts other than the high court were also not functioning properly because to the agitation and many government employees, including police personnel, had joined the stir.
The PILs submitted that the agitation in the form of rasta roko, rail roko and disruption of work at the public sector Singareni Collieries Limited besides causing colossal loss of public money and loss of power supply violated fundamental rights of citizens under Articles 14 (equality) and 21 (liberty) of the Constitution.
"Because of non-production of sufficient power, not only the government has imposed power cuts in Hyderabad, but also imposed power cuts in other districts as well," the petition said.
