Centre-Delhi row: No UT has its own services, SC told
◗ THE CENTRE alleged Mr Sisodia tried to create an “unwarranted prejudice” to ensure that AAP government’s interpretation of Article 239AA is accepted by the apex court
New Delhi, Dec. 5: No Union territory has its own services under the Constitution, the Centre told the Supreme Court on Monday, and disputed deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia’s claim about non-cooperation by government officials. The Centre alleged Mr Sisodia tried to create an “unwarranted prejudice” to ensure that AAP government’s interpretation of Article 239AA is accepted by the apex court.
Article 239AA of the Constitution grants special status to Delhi among the Union Territories through the 69th constitutional amendment. The affidavit filed by Union home secretary Ajay Bhalla on behalf of the Centre said the illustration (given by Sisodia in an affidavit about noncooperation of officials) are, by and large, vague and incapable of any precise examination by the Central government more particularly, when “no contemporaneous intimation of alleged failure is communicated to the Central government”.
“I state and submit that the administration of any unit of the administration, be it Central government, state government or Union Territory requires a very skillful coordination between the political executives and persons working in connection with the affairs of the respective unit. Such coordination takes place by effective administrative skills and not with the threat of control over the officers or employees,” he said.
Mr Bhalla added the very fact that right from 1993, the system has worked very smoothly is testimony to this fact and he (Sisodia) is advised not to say anything further on this issue as it would be improper to do so.
Referring to the ninejudge Constitution bench verdict in 1997, he said it had held that Delhi is a Union Territory and no UT under the Constitution has its own services which are not controlled by the Centre. The Centre and the Delhi government are locked in a bitter feud over control of services in the Union Territory.
Mr Bhalla said: “I have verified from all senior level officials of GNCTD about non-receipt of telecalls etc. and I have found that no such incidents have ever happened. It is submitted that all officials attended all meetings except on some occasions. On enquiry, I have learnt that the dates on which some officers could not attend the meetings were the dates on which they were assigned some other duties by the Delhi government itself.”
He insisted Mr Sisodia’s claims were “incorrect”.
“I am advised not to deal with individual’s illustrations which would have clearly shown the falsehood contained therein since the deponent of the affidavit is the deputy chief minister and it may not be proper, appropriate or in good taste to deal with such assertions, more particularly, when I have found them to be not true,” he said.
The Union home secretary, however, said he reserves the liberty to file affidavit qua each of the assertions made as and when so advised. On November 11, the top court had said it will step back from the “actual arena of political conflict” between the Delhi government and the Centre and only deal with the constitutional issue related to the control of services in the national capital.
The observations had come when Delhi government’s counsel Abhishek Singhvi wanted to bring to the notice of the bench an affidavit by Mr Sisodia in which he alleged there was a “paralysis in administration” as no bureaucrat was responding to ministers’ calls.