news details |
|
|
| Centre-Delhi govt face-off in Supreme Court over control of national capital | | | agencies
NEW DELHI, Apr 27: Describing Delhi as the "face of the nation", the Centre on Wednesday defended before the Supreme Court its control over transfers and postings of bureaucrats in Delhi even as the Arvind Kejriwal-led AAP government took exception to the Centre's submissions. "Since Delhi is the national capital, it's necessary that the Centre has powers over appointments and transfers of public servants. Delhi is the face of the nation. The world views India through Delhi," Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told a Bench led by Chief Justice of India NV Ramana which will resume the hearing on Thursday. "Since it's the national capital, it's necessary that the Centre has special powers over its administration and has control over important issues… The laws were meant to prevent any direct confrontation between the Centre and Delhi Government…," he said. Referring to the Balakrishnan Committee report, Mehta said it was in the national interest for the Centre to have control over the capital. On behalf of the Delhi Government senior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi opposed Mehta's submissions, terming it delaying tactics.
The Supreme Court had on March 3 issued notice to the Centre on the Delhi Government's petition challenging the validity of amended Government of NCT of Delhi Act, 2021 and Rule 13 of the Transaction of Business Rules, 1993 which allegedly gave more powers to Lieutenant Governor.
The tussle between Delhi Lt Governor and the elected Government of NCT has remained unresolved as the Supreme Court on February 14, 2019 delivered a split verdict on the issue of control of administrative services. The issue has since been referred to a three-judge Bench which would take it up along with the Delhi Government's fresh petition against the amended Government of NCT of Delhi Act, 2021.
A Bench of Justice AK Sikri and Justice Ashok Bhushan had different views as to who had powers to appoint and transfer officers of State Public Services under Entry 41, List II of the Constitution.
In view of the split verdict, the issue of "services" was referred to a larger Bench. Now the issue will come up before a three-judge Bench set up by the CJI. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
