![Image result for supreme court order on delhi government](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQzcUcD9Wj5XvT-A0RqVmxkY_wle9GyO27CtUAYGbxxatmNHFS6Fg) |
Kejariwal's Kismat Connection: कभी ख़ुशी कभी गम |
Some
facts about Delhi, LG and elected Government:
1.
Delhi is an Union
territory with special status or a state with limited status
2.
LG draws power
from article 239AA of the constitution.
According
to article 239AA (4), “There shall be a
Council of Ministers consisting of not more than ten per cent, of the total
number of Members in the Legislative Assembly, with the Chief Minister at the
head to aid and advise the Lieutenant Governor in the exercise to his functions
in relation to matters with respect to which the Legislative Assembly has
power to make laws, except in so far as he is, by or under any law, required to
act in his discretion. Provided that in the case of difference of opinion
between the Lieutenant Governor and his ministers on any matter, the Lieutenant
Governor shall refer it to the President for decision and act according to the
decision given thereon by the President and pending such decision it shall be
competent for the Lieutenant Governor in any case where the matter, in his
opinion, is so urgent that it is necessary for him to take immediate action, to
take such action or to give such direction in the matter as he deems necessary.”
In
view of the above provision let us decode the whole supreme court proceedings
and order there after. Just to make it simpler for understanding, it is placed in
form of dialogue between Shri Kejariwal and Supreme court.
Kejariwal:
Under 239AA and its
proviso, can the LG refuse to act on the basis of the aid and advice of the
state government?
Supreme
court: Yes, and in such a situation, he can refer the matter to the President, and will be
bound by what the President says.
Kejariwal:
Shall the LG differ in every matter whatsoever and refer them to the President?
Supreme
Court: No, this doesn’t mean he can—or should—differ on each and every small or
petty matter, and he should facilitate and not obstruct governance. It needs to
be an important or crucial matter only. Note:
(“important” or “crucial” matters are not defined by Supreme Court, hence
it is again a discretionary decision of the LG as to which case is to be
referred to the president and which is not to be.)
Kejariwal:
Will the services come under state government?Supreme
Court: Judgement is silent on it.(Note:
Since these are officers belonging to the Union cadre, UT cadre, and so on.
Therefore, disciplinary control, transfers etc. are sole responsibility of
central government.)
If
sermons by Supreme Court on democratic and constitutional morality is set aside
there is no alteration on Delhi high court’s verdict on August 2016. However
solace can be drawn by Shri Arvind Kejariwal on decision which says that the
difference of opinion by the LG can be on important and crucial matters only,
not routine ones. It leaves game open ended for both the parties for
future tussles. The LG may refer the matter to the President and State
government may refer such dispute to the court, claiming that it is not a
crucial matter.Show
must go on.Jai
hind.
A sincere thanks to all contributors ( which includes photo from Indian express and other contents from news articles)
Please give your candid comments on it, which will help making it more useful.
No comments:
Post a Comment