Decentralised capitals as a tool for balanced regional development: critically evaluate.

A decentralised capital places a State's executive, legislative and judicial seats in different cities to spread growth. Andhra Pradesh tried this in 2020 with its "three capitals" plan: Visakhapatnam as the executive capital, Amaravati as the legislative capital and Kurnool as the judicial capital. The plan has since been reversed. Parliament has now made Amaravati the sole capital by amending the AP Reorganisation Act, 2014 [2]. The case shows that the goal is valid but the tool is questionable.

Merits: why the idea appeals

• Regional inclusion: It signals that the State cares about lagging regions such as Uttarandhra and Rayalaseema, and so eases regional grievances.
• Growth poles: Government offices create demand for housing, services and transport in smaller cities.
• Avoids over-concentration: Growth before bifurcation was centred on Hyderabad, and residuary AP inherited that imbalance.
• Precedents: South Africa has three capitals. Maharashtra holds its winter session in Nagpur, which recognises Vidarbha's claims.

Limitations: why it underdelivers

• It moves officials, not investment: Offices draw little private capital compared with industry, ports or universities.
• Governance costs: Staff are duplicated, officials must travel and coordination between the secretariat, legislature and High Court is slower.
• Policy instability: The 2020 law was repealed in 2021. In its 3 March 2022 "Amaravati judgment", the High Court ordered the State to develop Amaravati [1]. The petitions against the plan were closed as infructuous only in 2026 [1], after a decade of uncertainty.
• Stranded investment and broken trust: 91 projects worth over ₹56,000 crore are under way in Amaravati [3]. The Centre cited a "long-pending structural uncertainty" that hurt investment [3], and land-pooling farmers bore the cost.
• Legal fragility: It is still unsettled whether a State can split its capital, because the Supreme Court appeals are pending [1].

Verdict and better alternatives

• Keep a single capital and pair it with time-bound backward-region support for Rayalaseema and north coastal AP, which the 2014 Act already provides for.
• Place industrial corridors, ports and universities in lagging regions.
• The capital law was passed at the request of the State Assembly's resolution [4]. This shows that cooperative federalism can give the capital stability.

In short, decentralised capitals address a real grievance with a costly and unstable instrument. A single stable capital, combined with targeted investment in lagging regions, better serves the Article 38(2) directive to reduce inequalities between areas and the goal of SDG 10. That would give balanced growth without the uncertainty Andhra Pradesh went through.