Bill on Andhra Pradesh’s Amaravati a warning bell for Mumbai, says Shiv Sena (UBT) in 'Saamana'

Shiv Sena UBT has raised concerns over the passage of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Bill 2026 which ratifies Amaravati as the official capital of Andhra Pradesh arguing that the legislation could create a constitutional precedent with implications for Maharashtra and MumbaiIn an editorial published in the party mouthpiece Saamana on Saturday the Uddhav Thackerayled party claimed that while the bill is specific to Andhra Pradesh it has triggered debate over the extent of Parliaments powers in matters traditionally considered the domain of state governmentsEditorial questions Parliaments role in deciding state capitalsThe editorial argued that the key issue is whether Parliament should have the authority to designate or ratify a states capital cityAccording to the article Article 3 of the Constitution empowers Parliament to alter state boundaries create new states change names and modify territorial limits However it contended that decisions relating to a states capital have historically been made by the respective state governmentsThe party claimed that the Amaravati legislation could be interpreted as expanding the Centres role in matters that were previously viewed as falling within the jurisdiction of statesShiv Sena UBT raises concerns over Mumbais future statusCiting the views of party leader Anil Shidore the editorial alleged that the legislation could serve as a model for future interventions by the Centre in state affairsIt argued that if Parliament can legislate on the status of a state capital in one case similar measures could theoretically be introduced elsewhere The editorial suggested a hypothetical scenario in which Mumbai could be designated a National Economic Zone and subsequently converted into a Union Territory through parliamentary legislationThe party claimed that such a move could weaken Maharashtras control over the countrys financial capital though it did not provide any indication that such a proposal is currently under consideration by the CentreCriticism of Maharashtras ruling allianceThe editorial also targeted Maharashtras ruling Mahayuti alliance including Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis and Deputy Chief Ministers Eknath Shinde and Ajit Pawar accusing the leadership of failing to adequately protect the states interestsAccording to the article the current political leadership lacks the commitment required to safeguard Maharashtras regional identity and autonomy The party alleged that cultural and political issues affecting the state have not received sufficient attention from those in powerThe editorial further claimed that decisions affecting Mumbais future could face little resistance if the states leadership remains passive on matters concerning Maharashtras interestsReference to Maharashtras historical movementDrawing on the history of the Samyukta Maharashtra movement the editorial emphasised that Mumbai became part of Maharashtra after a prolonged political struggle and the sacrifice of 106 martyrsThe party argued that preserving Mumbais status within Maharashtra remains an emotional and political issue for many residents of the state It claimed that previous generations of leaders and political organisations had consistently resisted attempts that could dilute the citys connection with MaharashtraAmaravatis development also comes under scrutinyApart from constitutional concerns the editorial questioned the progress of Amaravatis development as Andhra Pradeshs capital cityIt noted that despite the acquisition of large tracts of land and substantial public investment following the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh and the creation of Telangana several planned projects in Amaravati remain incompleteThe article claimed that many proposed administrative buildings are yet to be fully operational and argued that legislative recognition alone does not guarantee the successful development of a capital cityPolitical debate likely to continueThe editorial concluded by warning that decisions affecting state identity and regional autonomy require constant vigilance from political leaders and citizens alikeWhile the Centre has not responded to the claims made in the Saamana editorial the remarks have added a new dimension to the political debate surrounding the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Bill and its potential constitutional implicationsThe comments also reflect the continuing political significance of Mumbais status within Maharashtra an issue that has historically remained central to regional politics in the stateWith inputs from IANS