‘ Delhi won’t get absolute powers’
The Centre on Wednesday asserted in the Supreme Court that no independent decision- making power has been vested to the elected government of UT of Delhi as it is a national capital.
Additional solicitor general Maninder Singh argued that Constitution makers have declined to confer Delhi full statehood and the special status will not bring the Union Territory ( UT) of Delhi to the level of a State. Delhi not being a state, the court cannot provide Delhi the status of a state government. What is not contemplated in the Constitution cannot be conferred by interpreting its provisions, Mr Singh said.
The ASG made this submission before a five- judge Constitution Bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and justices A. K. Sikri, A. M. Kanwilkar, D. Y. Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan.
Mr. Singh submitted that the Centre formed a committee in 1987 to consider the demand of various political parties to give statehood to Delhi. The panel considered the demand, but in its report did not accept it and suggested that Delhi be a UT with special powers.
The report also made it clear that Centre must have unfettered powers in the capital’s administration, even with regard to routine day- to- day functions. It would be unrealistic to expect the Delhi’s elected government to manage the UT affairs on its own. The functional autonomy is vested with the President, he said.
He said Parliament, while amending the Constitution, inserted Article 239 AA ( 4), which said there would be an state Assembly to enact laws, which aren’t under the central list. The ASG said Delhi being the capital, the responsibility of the affairs of Delhi has been vested with the Centre. The executive powers are to be exercised by it, through the President’s nominee, the lieutenant governor.
Mr Singh added all services would come under the Union government’s control and appointments, postings and transfers too will vest with the Centre.
The arguments will continue in SC on Thursday.
◗ The court can’t provide Delhi the status of a state. What is not there in the Constitution cannot be conferred by interpreting its provisions, the ASG said