Court adjourns hearing of AAP’s petition to dissolve Assembly, but asks Centre to come with positive result
With the Delhi Assembly under suspended animation for more than five months, the Supreme Court on Tuesday told the Centre to either decide on dissolving the House or elect a popular government within five weeks. The BJP and the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) have 28 MlAs each in the 70-member House and the Congress has eight. Three seats are vacant after BJP MlAs got elected to the lok Sabha.
A Constitution Bench of Justices Hl Dattu, J Chelameswar, AK Sikri, RK Agarwal, and Arun Mishra was hearing a petition filed by the AAP challenging the February 15 President order to keep Delhi Assembly in suspended animation.
The Bench said, “One party says it does not want to form Government. Other says it cannot. Third party has no strength. In a situation like this why should people suffer.”
The judges wondered, “Suppose a citizen comes before us and tells us that I want my elected representative to work. He can say that the taxpayers’ money is being paid as salary to the MlAs, but there is no work for them. He can say I want my elected representative to work. But, you (Centre) are not allowing them to work.”
Pointing to this problem arising from the petition, the apex court told the Centre that it expected a positive result. “We are adjourning the matter for five weeks. You must come back with a positive result,” the Bench told Additional Solicitor General (ASG) PS Narasimha, who appeared for the Centre.
While the Centre assured the court that all endeavours will be made to ensure the mandate given by people is not allowed to be wasted, the Congress justified the “suspended animation” of the House. But senior advocate Fali Nariman, who argued on behalf of the AAP, demanded dissolution of the House and conduct of fresh elections in the State.
The court wished to know what steps the Centre had taken to explore the possibility of Government formation during the last five months. “We are not looking at political party before us. We are looking at the Delhi residents’ point of view...He may say he has elected a representative and he is drawing salary from taxpayers’ money and sitting idle,” the Bench said. The court, however, did not favour AAP’s demand for holding fresh election in Delhi along with four other States.
Nariman argued on Constitutional questions challenging l-G’s decision to act contrary to the majority Government’s recommendation for dissolving the House. But the Bench said it did not wish to decide the Constitutional questions, but a solution to the stalemate.
For the Congress, senior advocate K Parasaran argued that any solution has to be found by the l-G and the court could not interfere in this regard. It was then that the court agreed to adjourn the matter by five weeks while directing the Centre to positively consider breaking the political deadlock.