Supreme Court to pronounce verdict on Delhi-Centre power tussle, tomorrow

The AAP government had argued that the LG has been taking many executive decisions and a “harmonious interpretation” of Article 239AA of the Constitution was needed to fulfil the constitutional mandate for a democratically-elected Delhi government. The article deals with power and status of Delhi.

The Centre had contended before the bench that Delhi government cannot have the “exclusive” executive powers as it would be against national interests and referred to the 1989 Balakrishnan committee report that had dealt with the reasons for not granting the status of a state to Delhi.

Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, Deputy CM Manish Sisodia, Health Minister Satyender Jain and Rural Development Minister Gopal Rai at the sit-in, in LG Anil Baijal’s office.

It had also argued that several “illegal” notifications were issued by the Delhi government and they were challenged in the high court. The Centre had referred to the Constitution, the 1991 Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Act and the Transaction of Business of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Rules to drive home the point that the President, the union government and the LG had supremacy over city dispensation in administering the national capital.

On the other hand, the Delhi government had accused the LG of making a “mockery of democracy”, saying he was either taking decisions of an elected government or substituting them without having any power. During the arguments, the apex court had said it would only lay down the principles on the status of the national capital under the Constitution and not deal with issues arising out of individual notifications issued by the Delhi government on matters like the ‘mohalla clinics’ and regularisation of guest teachers.

AAP workers march from CM Kejriwal’s residence to the office of L-G Baijal in New Delhi, Wednesday. (Photo: Gajendra Yadav)

The high court, in its August 4, 2016 verdict, had said that LG is the administrative head of National Capital Territory and AAP government’s contention that he is bound to act on the advice of Council of Ministers was “without substance”.

While battery of senior lawyers — P Chidambaram, Gopal Subramanium, Rajeev Dhavan, Indira Jaising — had argued for the Arvind Kejriwal government, the NDA government at the Centre was represented by Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Maninder Singh in the marathon proceedings.