news details |
|
|
| Apex Court on supremacy tussles in Delhi | | | Jamwal Mahadeep Singh | 7/5/2018 11:16:51 PM |
| The Apex Court verdict of 4 July 2018, on CM-LG row in national capital Delhi is not required to be viewed as victory or forfeit of any one of the players in battle ground of highest seat of judiciary for supremacy. It is a demarcation of 'Laxman Rekha' earmarked by Apex Court in democratic culture as to realize the space to be occupied by two power corridors, who were frequently indulging in allegations against one another of cross over to restricted barriers of their authority, in a status situation of Delhi. Here we have to aware our self that Constitution (Sixty ninth Amendment) Act, 1991 that came into force on 1-2-1992, added articles, 239AA after article 239A, that changed the status of Union Territory of Delhi as National Capital Territory of Delhi and its administrator Lt. Governor with creation of a legislative assembly for Delhi. The legislative assembly can make laws on the state list and concurrent list except on public order, land and police. The Council of Ministers with the Chief Minister at the head to aid and advise the Lieutenant Governor in the exercise to his functions in relation to matters with respect to which the legislative assembly has power to make laws, except in so far as he is, by or under any law, required to act in his discretion. Provided that in the case of difference of opinion between the Lieutenant Governor and his Ministers on any matter, the Lieutenant Governor shall refer it to the President for decision. So the ruling of the Supreme Court that Delhi Lieutenant Governor cannot act independently and must take the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers and in acute differences of opinion, LG has to refer the matter to President for adjudication are underlined version by the Apex Court already laid down in the Constitution itself.
The people had been observing a long drawn controversy betwixt Delhi CM and LG that commenced right from Delhi Legislative Assembly elections 2015. LG Anil Baijal and his predecessor Najeeb Jung and the Delhi government have been locked in a bitter power tussle ever since the AAP swept to power in Delhi in 2015. The Delhi voters confined the BJP in Delhi Assembly merely to 3 seats of 70, that has captured the parliamentary elections 2014 with thumping majority and was flying high riding on Modi's shoulder and 'AAP' captured rest of 67 seats. This was something more than a shameful defeat for BJP and great set back to Modi je. This laid the beginning of direct controversy between CM (elected by voters) and LG (appointed by central Government) sponsored by BJP think tank to set his score of shameful defeat. There were commentaries in public domain that then LG of Delhi Mr. Najib Jung was caught in the power tussle between Center and State that forced him to resign than to compromise with the undue influence and dictates of Modi government.
So we have to understand what actually has been handed down by the Apex Court to earmark the 'Laxman Rekha' between CM and LG, a long drawn controversy that led to only churning of the common man of Delhi. There is much to be seen with regard to LG and almost negligible against CM in the verdict. The peoples mandate has been given the sanctity over appointment. There is a clear message from Apex Court for both the players in supremacy game that there is no space for absolutism or anarchy in Constitution and it is required to be taken seriously. Both players are required to understand that both have to serve the constitutional obligations bestowed upon them by their election and selection to the constitutional posts. The strong worded message of the bench is eye opener and indicator that there was definitely exploitation of unique position of Delhi status. The voice of people (elected government) was in suppression by some vested interests and was fired upon by keeping the barrels on LG's shoulder thereby the honorable Apex Court has to communicate that people's will can't be allowed to lose its purpose and held that real power must be vested with elected government and not with the Lieutenant Governor. The constitutional powers of Delhi government were somewhere held in shackles as such Court has to remark that executive powers of Delhi government must be given some degree of independence within the area on which the constitution allows it to legislate and administer. It has been said that a right without a remedy is no right at all and this quite fits to the working of LG in Delhi when Apex Court said that LG has no independent decision-making power and cannot behave as an obstructionist, when the Constitution gives primacy to the representative form of government. LG although the administrative head of Delhi but he cannot stall all the decisions of council of ministers who have been elected to address aims and aspirations of the electorate. LG should not act in a mechanical manner to refer all decision of the council of ministers to President citing difference of opinion. Only in exceptional cases the LG can refer the cases to President, when he has legitimate and serious differences of opinion with the decision taken by the council of Ministers headed by Delhi Chief Minister.
The LG in the whole exercise appears to have over jumped the powers delegated to him by the constitution, (that dragged the matter for judicial adjudication) a body of laws which are superior to all subsequent statutes and other acts which embodies all delegations of power. By usurpation of constitutional obligations, such constitutional posts are dented by those occupying them and we have seen that it is deliberately attempted to appease their masters. Some constitutional amendments are required to deal with such element that is responsible to degrade the constitutional endowments. There have been numerous acts by officials and even by those holding constitutional posts, including regulations, executive orders, and ordinary decisions and actions taken under color of law, which have been unconstitutional. There are countless occasions where the Apex Court has to act to restore the compliance with the Constitution as is seen in the Delhi supremacy tussle.
Concluding the prevailing situation in Delhi power tussle least expected to subside even after the Apex Court's demarcation of power lines betwixt LG and CM and this all is because of egotism predominant at three corners i.e. Union Government, Lieutenant governor, and Delhi Government. The three power seats i.e. PM, LG and CM have to realize that all are holding constitutional posts, where PM and CM are voice of people and they should work in unison to the common interests and betterment of people and LG should not work as a party machine to set his masters score in settling shameful defeat hammered by electors. The time is mature enough to think of having Governors and Lieutenant governors a politically detached figure and eminent people from different walks of life like missile man of India as President. The ambitions of political masters to become as king-emperors by capturing power by fair or foul is on increasing trends in the present time and ethics of democracy are being pushed to the tight corner. We are well informed that Governors have been found working at the behest of the Centre rather than performing their obligations as constitutional watchdogs. The institution continues to be revered and important but the quality of the incumbents has time and again lowered the institutional prestige. Certain amendments need to be made to streamline the position of governor, improve the quality of incumbents and provide dignity to this august office. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
