Jagan suggests larger ‘capital area’ as alternative proposal to Amaravati

E-PaperSubscribeSubscribeEnjoy unlimited accessSubscribe Now! Get features like YSR Congress Party president and former chief minister YS Jagan Mohan Reddy came out with an alternative proposal to Amaravati, describing it as a “Plan B” for the capital region, as the Lok Sabha on Wednesday passed the AP Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill, 2026, seeking to declare Amaravati as the permanent capital city of Andhra Pradesh, . Jagan suggests larger ‘capital area’ as alternative proposal to AmaravatiAddressing a press conference at the party office, Jagan suggested that instead of confining the capital to Amaravati, the government should consider declaring the 110-kilometre urban corridor stretching from Machilipatnam to Vijayawada and Guntur as the State’s capital area. He proposed that the region be named “Mavigun,” representing Machilipatnam, Vijayawada and Guntur. He said it could be developed as an integrated capital zone, arguing that such a model would unlock long-term economic and infrastructural growth. “If the government thinks the name ‘Mavigun’ reminds people of Jagan, then it can choose another name,” he said. In the afternoon, YSRCP MPs, led by parliamentary party leader P Mithun Reddy, staged a walkout from the Lok Sabha, stating that the Bill, in its current form, did not offer any meaningful benefit to the State and was instead being used to provide legal cover to a politically driven project in Amaravati. Explaining the rationale behind the “Mavigun” proposal, Jagan said Machilipatnam is about 70 km from Vijayawada, while Vijayawada is around 40 km from Guntur, making the three-city belt a natural urban and economic cluster. He argued that rather than concentrating all development in one limited zone, the government should declare the entire corridor as a capital area, thereby allowing distributed growth and better use of public investment. According to him, the combined population of the three regions is close to 4 million, and with focused spending on infrastructure, connectivity, administration, and urban services, the area could witness rapid and balanced development. Jagan said the YSR Congress Party was not opposed to Amaravati or any particular region, and maintained that the party had never taken an anti-regional stand on the capital issue. He argued that the concept of a “capital” does not explicitly exist in the Constitution, which instead refers to “seats of governance.” Citing the Centre’s reported submissions before courts, he maintained that the Centre had no role in deciding the State capitals and that it is for the States to decide their capitals without interference from the Central government. Raising questions over the Amaravati project, Jagan said the government had failed to deliver on promises made to farmers who gave land under the pooling scheme. He alleged that even after acquiring around 50,000 acres initially, basic infrastructure such as roads, electricity, water supply, and drainage remained incomplete. He further criticised the expansion of the capital region to nearly one lakh acres, stating that the cost of infrastructure alone could rise to ₹2 lakh crore. “How many decades will it take to mobilise such funds?” he asked, questioning the financial viability of the project. Jagan also accused the government of inflating costs, claiming that construction expenses per square foot had risen sharply. “We are not opposed to Amaravati or, for that matter, any region of the State, but are opposed to ‘corruption in the name of capital development,’” he said. Participating in the Lok Sabha debate, Mithun Reddy said the legislation on Amaravati failed to address the core concerns of the people, particularly farmers who had given land for the capital city under the land pooling scheme. He said the government had assured landowners that they would be allotted developed plots in return for the lands they surrendered, but alleged that many of those commitments remained unfulfilled. Mithun Reddy also raised doubts over the financial viability of Amaravati, questioning how the State government intended to mobilise the enormous funds required to complete the capital city project. He pointed out that only around ₹5,000 crore had reportedly been spent on Amaravati so far, and argued that there was still no clear answer to key questions: When will Amaravati be completed, what will be the total cost, and from where will the money come? He said Andhra Pradesh was already under severe financial stress and debt burden, and therefore the government owed the public an explanation on how it planned to proceed with such a capital-intensive project. Srinivasa Rao is Senior Assistant Editor based out of Hyderabad covering developments in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana . He has over three decades of reporting experience.