Centre, Delhi govt tussle: SC to hear matter related to control of bureaucrats

In May, a three-judge bench headed by then Chief Justice Of India NV Ramana held the Constitution Bench shall adjudicate the limited issue relating to ‘Services’ in Delhi

The Supreme Court will on Wednesday take up the matter related to the power tussle between the Centre and the Delhi government over the control of bureaucrats in the national capital four months after the case was referred to a Constitution Bench of justices Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, MR Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and PS Narasimha.

The Centre has pressed for a fresh adjudication to set the boundaries of the AAP government in Delhi. (HT PHOTO)

In May, a three-judge bench headed by then Chief Justice Of India NV Ramana held the Constitution Bench shall adjudicate the limited issue relating to ‘Services’ in Delhi and that no other substantial issue on interpretation of Article 239AA shall be adjudicated afresh.

Article 239AA delineates the legislative and executive powers of the Delhi government and says three subjects namely land, police, and public order shall remain under the exclusive domain of the Centre.

The Centre pressed for a fresh adjudication by a Constitution Bench to set the boundaries of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) government in Delhi in terms of transfer and appointment of bureaucrats.

It submitted there can be more than the three subjects specifically mentioned under sub-section 3 of Article 239AA (land, police, and public order) on which the Delhi government is restricted from passing a law. The Centre added that this aspect should be clarified by another five-judge bench.

The Delhi government opposed the Centre’s views, seeking a quick decision on whether or not it has the executive power to transfer and appoint bureaucrats.

A Constitution Bench in July 2018 held the executive power of the Centre with respect to Delhi is confined to land, police, and public order under subsection 3 of Article 239AA.

Solicitor general Tushar Mehta and additional solicitor general Sanjay Jain, appearing for the Centre, made the point during the proceedings in April that the 2018 judgment has not specifically held that the Delhi government is empowered to make laws on all subjects other than land, police, and public order.

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the AAP government, countered this submission. He argued the 2018 verdict is unequivocal in demarcating the powers of the Delhi government and that the Centre’s submissions are aimed at eroding the federal structure. Singhvi added that accepting the Centre’s submissions would render the Delhi legislative assembly meaningless.