Centre may seek review of Supreme Court’s verdict
They (the AAP government) said Delhi is a state like other states and the governor is like other governors. This (contention) has been rejected. A SENIOR CENTRAL GOVT OFFICIAL
NEW DELHI: The Centre on Wednesday contested the Aam Aadmi Party’s (AAP) claims of victory following the Supreme Court judgment on Delhi’s status, with a senior government functionary stating that the top court had merely reiterated the special status of Delhi and the fact that the Lieutenant Governor (LG) was not like governors of other states but has special powers.
An official dealing with the matter said the government could approach the Supreme Court for a review of the decision but the final call would be taken by the home ministry to whom the L-G reports.
“They (the AAP government) said Delhi is a state like other states and the governor is like other governors. This (contention) has been rejected,” the functionary said on condition of anonymity.
Wednesday’s judgment upheld “Delhi’s special status as a territory and that it is not a state in the conventional sense,” he said.
“The LG still has the right to reserve decisions (taken by the Delhi government) for consideration by the President,” he added.
The Centre, however, admitted that the LG will not be able to exercise the power of referring the state government’s decisions to the President “in a routine manner” following the judgment. The L-G will also have to record the reasons for referring a government decision to the President, the functionary added.
Law and order, policing and land still will remain outside the purview of the Delhi government.
Hours after the judgment, Home minister Rajnath Singh said the Centre will study the judgment and then react.
A second official connected with the matter said the government is yet to take a call on whether it will seek a review.
“The MHA (home ministry) has to take a call on whether to approach the court against the decision,” this person said. “Certain paragraphs do lend themselves to a review.”
According to the second official, the Constitution bench, headed by the Chief Justice had interpreted Article 239 AA which deals with the National Capital Territory and was added through an amendment in 1991, this “has to be read with the General Clauses Act which defines a union territory with or without a legislature” .
The government functionary said the court on Wednesday had also said that the nine petitions filed before it, seven by the AAP government and two others by the LG, will be dealt with by regular benches.
“The Supreme Court has only given the constitutional interpretation of Article 239 AA,” he added. CHENNAI: The Supreme Court’s verdict on Wednesday on the tussle between Lieutenant Governor and the elected government has given a new lease of hope to Puducherry chief minister V Narayanasamy, who has found himself involved in an imbroglio with governor Kiran Bedi.
“The ruling given by the Supreme Court is what I have been reiterating for the past two years in the Puducherry Union Territory,” a beaming Narayanasamy told Hindustan Times.
Like in Delhi, Puducherry has witnessed problems between the L-G and the CM over several issues.
But the SC stand has now given the elected government in Puducherry a reason to cheer.
“The SC verdict has validated that the elected government is the final authority. L-G should talk with the council of ministers before taking a decision. There are no merits in the L-G taking unilateral decisions. The SC verdict fixing the power tussle in Delhi is very relevant to Puducherry too,” the CM said.