Government arguments are now pending in the High Court over the relocation of capital from Amravati and the establishment of three capitals in the name of decentralization of governance. Central to those arguments was the state government’s decision to change the capital. Kendrikrtamavutundani in the development of tailor-billion to be spent together, as well as the development of the three parts of the case before a bench headed by jikemahesvari cipjastis said they would be decentralized. However, there are no loopholes in this argument. There are no limits to what the state government can like, and questions are coming up as to whether the capital can be changed if the government changes every five years. Prosecutors said the Chandrababu Naidu government had earlier rejected the recommendation of the Shivaramkrishnan Committee appointed on the capital and made the decision at its discretion, adding that the politicians on the committee with Minister Narayana did not value the sentiments of experts except the advice of the business community. The Shivaramkrishnan Committee said that Guntur was not the central capital of Vijayawada. The fertile lands there are to be preserved. He said that they are implementing the three methods of green capital, decentralized capital where different departments are located in different places, or capital in an already developed city. In fact Sivaramakrishnan wrote an article in Hindu that even after the determination of Amravati there was no proper concentration of extremism. He pointed out that the strategy required for employment and business development is important. He also clarified that it was suicidal to concentrate all the resources in Amravati now as he was a fan of Chandrababu who had developed things like IT during his first tenure as Chief Minister. This is in response to the argument made by some on behalf of Telugudesam that they have chosen the green capital out of the three opportunities given by Sivaramakrishnan. But whether the perspective of the three capitals is out of place has become a major question on the government’s argument. The tribunal questioned whether the governments of Ahmedabad, Gandhinagar and Raipur had moved to a specific location near or where they were located, but where was the scope for the concept of three capitals. Most importantly, after the High Court was set up in Amravati, he asked how the Legislative Assembly would decide whether there should be a Judicial Capital in Kurnool. Dushyant Dave, Shriram said that they had decided to seek the Center. However the tribunal did not appear to be satisfied with their answer. The notion of three capitals, including judicial capital, seems likely to be a major objection in this case. The judiciary was also of the opinion that Dushyant Dave should have exercised more. If the court puts the argument that way there are also some political signs in the case of capital as well as politics. BJP president Somu Veerraju announced in Anantapur that Amravati would continue to be the capital. The High Court will be shifted to Kurnool. It is noteworthy that Janasena president Pawan Kalyan said the same thing after the recent meeting of BJP national president Nadda. This means that it is doubtful whether the BJP’s policy in this regard will change. On the other hand, CPM secretary Madhu, who has been protesting on her own without joining the agitation with a party like the TDP CPI, also said that the Amravati movement would gain further strength. However, he advised the organizers to go ahead and include ten people without turning around anyone. In fact TDP has eased some of the rush compared to the past. Given the way the case is being handled in the High Court and the response of the party, it seems that the climate will change somewhat. While it is certain that the Jagan government will go to the Supreme Court over the High Court verdict, the determination of the three capitals seems to be in jeopardy.