New Delhi, Sep 5 (IANS) The Supreme Court on Monday said that it will hear, on September 9, the plea of the Delhi government challenging the Delhi High Court’s decision on the power and position of the Lt. Governor.
The Arvind Kejriwal government had challenged the Delhi High Court verdict that Lt. Governor was the administrative head and had the final word in the governance of the national capital of Delhi.
A bench of Chief Justice T.S. Thakur and Justice D.Y. Chandrachud set the date for hearing the plea that the Lt. Governor was obliged to act on the aid and advice of the council of ministers after senior counsel Gopal Subramaniam mentioned the matter for an early hearing on Monday.
The Kejriwal government had on September 2 informed the top court that it was withdrawing its suit seeking declaration of Delhi as a state because it had already filed six petitions since August 31 challenging the high court order on the issue as to who wields the real power in the governance of national capital – the government elected by the people or nominated Lt. Governor.
Delhi High Court by its August 5 verdict had ruled that the Lt. Governor was the administrator of the national capital and, therefore, had the final say in its governance, and was not bound by the aid and advice of the council of ministers. “Policy direction can’t be issued without communicating to Lt. Governor.”
The high court had ruled that decisions taken by Delhi’s Council of Ministers had to be communicated to the the Lt. Governor and if the Lt. Governor took a different view on it, a reference had to be made to the central government.
Having ruled in favour of Lt. Governor, the high court had also quashed the commission of inquiry set up by the Delhi government to look into the award of work related to grant of CNG Fitness Certificates in the transport department.
It had also set aside the commission of inquiry to probe into the allegations of irregularities in functioning of Delhi and District Cricket Association as it held that it was set up “without seeking the views/concurrence of the Lt Governor”.
However, on the appointment of public prosecutors, the high court had held that though the Lt. Governor was competent to appoint them, he had to act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers.