English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Supreme Court clips the wings LG had sprouted, says has no independent powers

Published

on

Supreme Court clips the wings LG had sprouted, says has no independent powers

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Ruling that the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi is bound to act according to the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers in all matters under its jurisdiction, a Constitution bench of the Supreme Court on Wednesday, July 4 set at rest the prolonged tussle over powers between the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) and the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi that saw the latter revoking several decisions of the Arvind Kejriwal-led AAP government.

The Supreme Court Constitution bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices AK Sikri, AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan, however, stopped short of acknowledging total statehood for Delhi as demanded by the Aam Admi Party (AAP).

The judgment pronounced in the court by Chief Justice Dipak Misra also held that the LG cannot act as an “obstructionist”. Two other judges, Justices AK Sikri and AM Khanwilkar, concurred with the verdict.

The top court made it clear that except for anything related to land, police and public order, the Lt Governor has no independent decision-making powers under the constitution.

“The Lt Governor is an administrator in a limited sense and is not the Governor. He is bound by the advice of cabinet advice in matters other than those exempted,” the court said.

The court said: “The states should enjoy freedom without unsolicited interference from the centre…popular will cannot be allowed to lose its purpose.”

Adding muscle to the AAP dispensation, the court observed: “The NCT requires some kind of freedom, subject to the limitations imposed upon it. The Lt Governor works on the aid and advice of the council of ministers of the state. The Lt Governor must not act in a mechanical manner. The Lt Governor must work in accordance with the council of ministers.

“Our constitution is constructive in nature, with no room for autonomy,” said the bench.

The reasons listed by the bench were unambiguous. In its order the bench said the Lieutenant Governor cannot act mechanically by referring every Executive decision taken by the state’s council of ministers to the President of India. The court made it clear that while the LG enjoys the powers of an administrator, he must “work on the aid and advice of the council of ministers.”

The SC said: “All decisions of council of ministers must be communicated to the L-G, but that doesn’t mean concurrence of the L-G is required.”

The bench also observed that “A pragmatic orientation must be exhibited by the centre and the state.”

“There is no room for absolutism and there is no room for anarchism also,” the court said.

However, the bench drew the line at statehood. It said: “The NCT can never achieve the status of a state.”

Having said that, the court also added that the “Lt Governor has limited power, merely as that of an administrator.

About other nitty gritties, the  bench ordered: “The matter will be listed before the appropriate bench for further hearing as the bench has resolved the main issue.”

Earlier, Arvind Kejriwal and three of his cabinet colleagues staged a sit-in protest in the L-G office in June. They were protesting against an alleged delay in approval of key policies of the AAP government by L-G Anil Baijal and a “strike” by the civil servants. Kejriwal has launched a fresh “full statehood for Delhi” campaign with the objective of sending a petition to the Narendra Modi government after securing signatures of 10 lakh residents of the city.

The Delhi High Court had upheld the primacy of the Lieutenant Governor in Delhi in a 2016 ruling. The Kejriwal government moved the Supreme Court against the Delhi High Court judgment. The Supreme Court reserved its verdict in the case in December last year. The impending judgment is likely to settle the dispute over separation of powers between the local elected government and the Centre.

The Kejriwal government fielded a galaxy of senior lawyers including P Chidambaram and Indira Jaising to present its case in the Supreme Court. Additional Solicitor General Maninder Singh has argued for the Centre in the matter.

During the course of the hearing last year, the Supreme Court bench had once observed that it would restrict itself to examining the status of the national capital under the Constitution and lay down a set of principles to govern Delhi. It had refused to get into the issues arising out of Delhi government’s decisions and notifications related to regularisation of guest teachers and AAP’s pet programme mohalla clinics.

Reactions:

The judgment came as a major victory for Kejriwal and AAP who have been, for the past three years, engaged in a bitter battle with the LG office and the Centre, alleging that successive Lieutenant Governors (first Najeeb Jung and now Baijal) had been creating roadblocks in the functioning of the state’s executive under instructions from the Narendra Modi-led NDA government at the Centre.

Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal hailed this as a “big victory for the people of Delhi” and a “big victory for democracy.”

The BJP and Congress, which have been talking about limited powers of elected government in Delhi and the supremacy of LG, tried to claim the SC verdict justified their stand.

While the SC order cited Constituional provisions to restrict the LG’s authority, BJP’s Delhi unit chief Manoj Tiwari chose to target Arvind Kejriwal saying that he can longer rule in anarchy. “Start following the constitution and work for the betterment of Delhiites,” he wrote on Twitter.

BJP spokesperson Nalin Kohli also slammed AAP for terming SC verdict as a “victory” for their party. Adding that the main demand if statehood has been rejected by the Centre, Kohli said, “Don’t understand how Delhi govt is claiming this to be a victory? Their main plank was that this is a state whereas Court has unequivocally said its not a state. They said they had exclusive executive control that was rejected too. This is a UT, Centre has a role to play.”

“We welcome the SC verdict. The Delhi government should have been following the law even without the order of the court. We hope, they will do so after the judgement,” BJP MLA and Leader of Opposition in the Delhi Assembly Vijender Gupta said.

Delhi BJP spokesperson Praveen Shankar Kapoor said the verdict has “decided” that Delhi is a Union Territory and the AAP should stop raising their “political demand” for full statehood to the city. “It is now decided that Delhi is a UT. So, the AAP and Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal should stop raising the full statehood demand.”

Former chief minister of Delhi Sheila Dixit said what the Supreme Court has done is to reiterate the role of LG and Delhi government.[/vc_column_text][vc_raw_html]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[/vc_raw_html][vc_column_text]“As per Article 239 (AA) of the Constitution, Delhi is not a state, it is a Union Territory. If Delhi Government and LG don’t work together then Delhi will face problems. Congress ruled Delhi for 15 years, no conflict took place then,” ANI quoted Dikshit.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

India News

DU VC Prof Yogesh Singh entrusted with additional charge of AICTE Chairman

Published

on

By

Prof. Yogesh Singh, Vice Chancellor of the University of Delhi, has been entrusted with the additional charge of the post of Chairman, AICTE till the appointment of a Chairman of AICTE or until further orders, whichever is earlier.

It is noteworthy that AICTE Chairman Prof. TG Sitharam was relieved of his duties after his term ended on December 20, 2025. According to a letter issued by the Ministry of Education, Government of India, on Monday, Prof. Yogesh Singh’s appointment is until the appointment of a regular AICTE Chairman or until further orders whichever is earlier.

Prof. Yogesh Singh is a renowned academician with excellent administrative capabilities, who has been the Vice-Chancellor of University of Delhi since October 2021. He has also served as the Chairperson of the National Council for Teacher Education. In August 2023, he was also given the additional charge of Director of the School of Planning and Architecture (SPA).

Prof. Yogesh Singh served as the Vice-Chancellor of Delhi Technological University from 2015 to 2021; Director of Netaji Subhas Institute of Technology, Delhi from 2014 to 2017, and before that, he was the Vice-Chancellor of Maharaja Sayajirao University, Baroda (Gujarat) from 2011 to 2014. He holds a Ph.D. in Computer Engineering from the National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra. He has a distinguished track record in quality teaching, innovation, and research in the field of software engineering.

Continue Reading

India News

Goa nightclub fire case: Court extends police custody of Luthra brothers by five days

A Goa court has extended the police custody of Saurabh and Gaurav Luthra, owners of the nightclub where a deadly fire killed 25 people, by five more days.

Published

on

Luthra brothers

A court in Goa on Monday extended the police custody of Saurabh Luthra and Gaurav Luthra, the owners of the Birch by Romeo Lane nightclub, by five more days in connection with the deadly fire incident that claimed 25 lives on December 6.

The order was passed as investigators sought additional time to question the two accused in the case linked to the blaze at the Anjuna-based nightclub.

Owners were deported after fleeing abroad

According to details placed before the court, the Luthra brothers had left the country following the incident and travelled to Thailand. They were subsequently deported and brought back to India on December 17, after which they were taken into police custody.

Advocate Vishnu Joshi, representing the families of the victims, confirmed that the court granted a five-day extension of police custody for both Saurabh and Gaurav Luthra.

Another co-owner sent to judicial custody

The court also remanded Ajay Gupta, another owner of the nightclub, to judicial custody. Police did not seek an extension of his custody, following which the court passed the order, the victims’ counsel said.

The Anjuna police have registered a case against the Luthra brothers for culpable homicide not amounting to murder along with other relevant offences related to the fire incident.

Continue Reading

India News

Delhi High Court issues notice to Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi in National Herald case

Delhi High Court has sought responses from Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi on the ED’s plea challenging a trial court order in the National Herald case.

Published

on

The Delhi High Court has sought responses from Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi on a petition filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with the National Herald case. The petition challenges a trial court order that refused to take cognisance of the agency’s prosecution complaint.

Justice Ravinder Dudeja issued notices to the Gandhis and other accused on the main petition, as well as on the ED’s application seeking a stay on the trial court’s December 16 order. The high court has listed the matter for further hearing on March 12, 2026.

The trial court had ruled that taking cognisance of the ED’s complaint was “impermissible in law” because the investigation was not based on a registered First Information Report (FIR). It observed that the prosecution complaint under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) was not maintainable in the absence of an FIR for a scheduled offence.

According to the order, the ED’s probe originated from a private complaint rather than an FIR. The court further noted that since cognisance was declined on a legal question, it was not necessary to examine the merits of the allegations at that stage.

The trial court also referred to the complaint filed by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy and the summoning order issued in 2014, stating that despite these developments, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) did not register an FIR in relation to the alleged scheduled offence.

The ED has accused Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, late Congress leaders Motilal Vora and Oscar Fernandes, Suman Dubey, Sam Pitroda, and a private company, Young Indian, of conspiracy and money laundering. The agency has alleged that properties worth around Rs 2,000 crore belonging to Associated Journals Limited (AJL), which publishes the National Herald newspaper, were acquired through Young Indian.

The agency further claimed that Sonia and Rahul Gandhi held a majority 76 per cent shareholding in Young Indian, which allegedly took over AJL’s assets in exchange for a Rs 90 crore loan.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com