The YSR Congress Party (YSRCP) on Wednesday staged a walkout from the Lok Sabha, opposing the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill, 2026, which seeks to give statutory backing to Amaravati as the capital of Andhra Pradesh.
The Union government allotted two hours for discussion on the proposed legislation, which has gained major political significance amid renewed debate over the future of Andhra Pradesh’s capital.
While the Congress and the Samajwadi Party reportedly extended support to the Bill, the YSRCP adopted a critical yet nuanced stand, stating that it was not opposed to Amaravati as such, but had serious objections to the form and content of the legislation.
Participating in the Lok Sabha debate, YSRCP Parliamentary Party leader M Mithun Reddy outlined his party’s concerns and raised several questions regarding the implementation, financing, and intent behind the Bill.
Mithun Reddy said the YSRCP was not against Amaravati, but argued that the proposed legislation failed to address the key concerns of the people, especially the farmers who had given land under the land pooling scheme for the capital city.
He questioned why the promises made to Amaravati farmers at the time of land pooling had not been fully honoured.
He said the government had assured landowners that they would be given developed plots in return for the land they surrendered, but alleged that many of those assurances were still pending.
The YSRCP leader demanded clarity on when the farmers would receive their plots and urged the government to announce a clear timeline for implementation.
He said the concerns of farmers could not be ignored while pushing the legislation in Parliament.
Mithun Reddy also raised doubts about the financial viability of Amaravati and questioned how the State government planned to mobilise the huge funds needed to complete the capital city project.
He pointed out that only around ₹5,000 crore had reportedly been spent on Amaravati so far and said there was still no clarity on some basic questions:
When will Amaravati be completed? What will be the total cost? And where will the money come from?
He said Andhra Pradesh was already facing severe financial stress and debt burden, and therefore the government owed the people a proper explanation on how it intended to move forward with such a capital-intensive project.
Referring to the government’s claim that Amaravati would be developed as a self-financing project, he demanded transparency on the proposed funding model.
According to him, unless the government clearly explains the financial structure, implementation schedule, and safeguards for farmers, the Bill cannot be accepted in its present form.
During the debate, Mithun Reddy also alleged that the Amaravati project had become a breeding ground for corruption and contractor-driven interests.
He claimed that the capital city project was increasingly being shaped in a way that benefited a select group of contractors, rather than serving the broader interests of the people of Andhra Pradesh.
He argued that the Bill, in its current form, would offer no meaningful benefit to the State and was instead being used to provide legal cover to a politically driven project without addressing the practical and financial realities on the ground.
“The issue is not opposition to Amaravati, but opposition to an incomplete and flawed legislative framework,” he said, while announcing that his party was walking out of the House in protest against the Bill and what it described as the failure of both the Centre and the State government to answer critical questions.
