Ambati Criticizes Naidu for Amaravati Emphasis, Claims Misinformation Campaign

Former minister Ambati Rambabu launched a scathing critique of Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N. Chandrababu Naidu on Monday, focusing primarily on the administration’s approach to developing Amaravati as the state capital while allegedly neglecting broader development priorities.

Speaking to reporters in Ongole, Rambabu accused Naidu of avoiding direct political engagement and instead resorting to what he described as “character assassination, false cases, and propaganda” to target political opponents. The former minister’s comments come amid growing tension between the ruling coalition and opposition parties in Andhra Pradesh.

“The Chief Minister is deliberately spreading misinformation about development models while refusing to engage in substantive policy debates,” Rambabu said. He specifically mentioned alleged misinformation regarding the proposed MAVIGUN development model, drawing connections to previous controversies that have plagued the state’s governance.

Central to Rambabu’s criticism was the government’s renewed focus on Amaravati, the planned capital city that has become a contentious political issue in Andhra Pradesh since the state’s bifurcation in 2014. Development of Amaravati has faced numerous hurdles, including changes in political leadership, funding challenges, and competing priorities for the state’s resources.

Rambabu questioned the financial viability of committing vast resources to Amaravati, noting that the government has proposed investments worth approximately Rs 75,000 crore without establishing a clear implementation timeline. “Where is the roadmap for these massive investments? How will they be funded, and over what period?” he asked.

The former minister argued that the administration’s singular focus on the capital region is creating regional imbalances in development. He suggested that alternative development approaches that would distribute economic growth more equitably across the state are being ignored in favor of concentrating resources in Amaravati.

According to Rambabu, the emphasis on capital development appears to be coming at the expense of critical welfare schemes. He specifically highlighted reductions in funding for healthcare initiatives like Aarogyasri, which provides medical insurance to lower-income residents, and educational support programs such as fee reimbursement schemes that assist students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds.

“While billions are being earmarked for constructing government buildings and infrastructure in Amaravati, essential social welfare programs that directly impact the lives of ordinary citizens are facing budget cuts,” Rambabu claimed.

The former minister also raised concerns about what he characterized as project cost inflation, suggesting that certain infrastructure projects have seen significant increases in their budgets without corresponding improvements in scope or quality. He specifically mentioned the Rayalaseema Lift Irrigation scheme, claiming the project has suffered from inconsistent policy direction and inadequate funding.

Rambabu’s criticism coincided with Chief Minister Naidu’s birthday, and he used the occasion to call for what he termed a return to “people-centric governance.” He claimed that public dissatisfaction with the current administration is growing due to unfulfilled promises and shifting priorities.

The comments highlight the ongoing political divisions in Andhra Pradesh, where development strategies—particularly regarding the capital city—have become deeply politicized. The debate over Amaravati reflects broader questions about resource allocation, regional development priorities, and governance approaches that have characterized state politics since reorganization.

Neither the Chief Minister’s office nor government representatives had responded to Rambabu’s allegations at the time of reporting. The controversy comes as the state government continues to navigate economic challenges while attempting to accelerate infrastructure development that was delayed during the previous administration.