The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) Government’s constant refrain that the Centre was not allowing an elected Government to work in the national Capital found some support from the Supreme Court on Wednesday as it observed that an elected Government should have some power for it to function.
A Bench of Justices AK Sikri and AM Sapre made this comment while dealing with a bunch of petitions filed by the Delhi Government in which it challenged various decisions taken by the lieutenant Governor (lG) in exercise of his power on behalf of the Centre to administer Delhi.
With Solicitor-General Ranjit Kumar claiming to be representing the Delhi Government on behalf of the lG and senior advocates Rajeev Dhavan and Gopal Subramanium appearing for the AAP Government also holding the brief for the Delhi Government, the SC felt that this situation did not augur well where lawyers from both sides are “fighting” in the court claiming to represent Delhi.
Claiming that lG’s decisions were aimed at disrupting the functioning of the Delhi Government, Subramanium submitted that managing the State had become difficult as no officer was willing to take command from the Ministers in the Delhi Government.
Agreeing with his plea, the SC said, “There is no doubt that Delhi is a Union Territory but there are special provisions for Delhi under the Constitution. An elected Government should have a right or otherwise the Government (in Delhi) would not be able to function at all.”
Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar pointed out to the court that an abnormal situation prevailed in the national Capital with the Chief Minister and Deputy Chief Minister filing affidavits in the court in their name. But here too, the court favoured the AAP Government, saying they (CM, Deputy CM) had no choice as officers were not taking instructions from the Delhi Government.
Dhavan told the court that the Centre acting through the lG had even struck down the panel of lawyers appointed by the Delhi Government. The situation was such that an elected Government was not able to choose lawyers of its choice for representing them in the court, he said. The Bench assured Dhavan that even if he is to be removed by the Centre, the court will retain him as amicus to argue this case. The matter was posted for hearing on January 18.