A division bench comprising Chief Justice Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta and Justice P.V. Sanjay Kumar of the Hyderabad High Court will hear a petition challenging the delay in the formation of separate High Courts for Telangana and AP.

While dealing with the plea by T. Dhangopal Rao, the bench asked E. Manohar, former advocate-general of undivided AP and senior counsel G. Vidyasagar to assist the court as amicus curiae in hearing the case in the light of provisions of the AP Reorganisation Act and the letters written by the Union minister of Law, and both the state governments.

When the bench sought the response from the state governments, K. Rama Krishna Reddy, advocate-general of Telangana said the state government had written to the Centre about availability of space in another building so that the Telangana High Court could function separately.

He also placed the letters written by the Union law minister to Chief Justice of Supreme Court and Chief Justice of Hyderabad High Court requesting them to take steps in this regard.

AP additional A-G Dammalpati Srinivas said the AP government had already intimated that it is ready for a separate High Court.

Maintaining that this needed careful deliberation, the bench pointed out that the Reorganisation Act stipulates that till a separate High Court for AP was set up the present High Court would continue to be common High Court for both the states. Once the separate High Court is constituted for AP, the existing High Court shall become the High Court for the state of Telangana.

The bench said that it would commence hearing on the plea from Thursday on a day-to-day basis and if there is any agitation which is likely to affect the adjudication it will not go ahead with the hearing.

While reminding that the process of separation starts with the formation of a separate High Court for Andhra Pradesh the bench said it will look into the issue in detail on whether the letter of the Union minister of law seeking a separate Telangana High Court itself is in tune with the provisions of the Reorganisation Act or not.

Making it clear that it is not expressing any opinion at this point the bench observed that nothing is impossible if correct steps are taken in an appropriate manner. The bench asked both states to file counter affidavits explaining their stand on this issue.