The Supreme Court on Monday decided to examine the Constitutional validity of the order imposing President’s Rule in Delhi by which the Assembly has been kept in suspended animation.
Issuing notice to the Centre on a petition by the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), the Bench of Justices RM lodha and Dipak Misra said, “There is a Constitutional issue involved. Whoever has passed the order, let them explain.” A Bench issued notice to the Centre asking it to respond within ten days on the issue raised by the AAP. Although the AAP had named the Congress and the BJP as parties in its petition, the Bench did not consider it necessary to seek their response.
The Bench said, “We do not want to make it a political contest,” while posting the matter for hearing on March 7. The challenge against the President’s Rule order of February 16 is on the question whether the President can act against the aid and advice of the State Cabinet in imposing Central rule and if so, for what reasons.
“Is it incumbent for the President that while passing an order under Article 356(1) reason must be givenIJ” the Bench asked senior advocate Fali S Nariman, who appeared for the AAP. Nariman said the AAP-led Government had recommended the dissolution of House to the lieutenant Governor. Following the stepping down of the Chief Minister and his Cabinet, the largest political party in the State, BJP, informed the l-G that it was not in a position to form a government. “Is there any discretion with the l-G to keep the House in suspended animation in these circumstances,” Nariman argued.
In the petition, the AAP contended that by keeping the House in suspended animation and not recommending fresh elections, President abrogated to himself all powers of the Cabinet and Assembly and allowed the party at the Centre to rule over Delhi, contrary to the popular wish of the people who had rejected the Congress in the December elections. The SC Bench fixed the matter for consideration on March 7 after giving 10 days to the Centre for response. The Bench treaded cautiously not to allow the proceedings to turn into a political match-scoring arena.