The Indian Express (Delhi Edition)
Placed political interest over school kids: HC raps Delhi govt
“YOU HAVE placed your political interest above the interest of school children,” said the Delhi High Court Friday, slamming the AAP- le d Delhi government while hearing a PIL on non- supply of notebooks, uniforms, and other stationery items to over 2 lakh Municipal Corporation of Delhi ( MCD) school students.
The MCD Commissioner Tuesday had told the HC that these students do not have operational bank accounts, and one of the major reasons for non- availability of these benefits is “non- formation of a Standing Committee”; only the committee has the “power and jurisdiction to award contracts worth over Rs 5 crore”. Highlighting that there “can’t be a vacuum” in the system, the HC had observed that if the committee is unavailable, then the financial power “has to be delegated forthwith” by the Delhi government to an appropriate authority — in the next two days.
On Friday, a division bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora asked the Delhi government counsel, Shadan Farasat, to seek instruction over the government’s position in the matter. In the evening, Farasat said he had taken instructions from the minister concerned, Urban Development Minister Saurabh Bharadwaj. “I communicated to him what the court had expressed prior to the recess. He indicated to me, on instructions orally, that even if they ( government) try to initiate the process of devolving the power to the MCD Commissioner, that will require the Chief Minister’s approval. Therefore, we are requesting that two weeks’ time may be granted for that process,” said Farasat.
On this, the bench orally observed that it shall not wait for two weeks and rather pass a “judicial order” as it cannot allow a vacuum to linger where students remain without books. “I’m sorry to say that you are asking us to say something more. It is your choice where you have said that the ‘ CM will continue despite being in jail’, we haven’t said so. That’s your conscious call,” observed the bench orally.
On Farasat stating that he had no instructions on this aspect, the bench said it will have to say this. “You are forcing us to go down a street that we have been avoiding. This is your administration’s call. You want us to castigate you, and we will come down with full vigour. We have said earlier, politely that, national interest is supreme and personal interest is at a lower pedestal,” said the bench, referring to PILS it had adjudicated seeking the removal of the CM following his arrest — by the Enforcement Directorate on March 21 — and custody in the Delhi excise policy case.
Farasat submitted that Delhi L- G V K Saxena had nominated aldermen to the MCD without the aid and advice of the elected government, which was challenged in the Supreme Court and a decision is awaited. He, thereafter, said the aldermen are supposed to vote in the election to the Standing Committee and so, effectively, the constitution was not final.
The bench, however, said the fact was that the committee had not been constituted.
According to Farasat, to resolve the issue, a resolution had been adopted and passed in the MCD that all powers of the standing committee may be given to the corporation so no work is stalled. He, however, said this needs to be implemented by the MCD Commissioner who had not sent a proposal beyond Rs 5 crore, and if sent, it will be “cleared immediately”.
“My lord may test this... for a week, 10 days, if it doesn’t work, we are here,” Farasat said. On this, the bench said: “We know if for a week students don’t get textbooks... you are least bothered. You are only concerned about how much power you can arrogate to yourself.”
Farasat also said in reality, the government does not have that much power. “The reality is, due to distribution of services in the government, when the minister calls, no civil servant responds. I can place it on record. It’s a reality,” said Farasat, seeking some time for a resolution.
On this, the bench orally observed that no more time should be given to the government “at the expense of the children”, as it already had given time — on Tuesday — to the government to take a call on the matter.
“Now you are virtually asking us to pass strictures against you. So, we will do it. We will not mince words. You have been in power for so long and have done nothing. On these sorts of matters, there should have been a broad consensus. People who lead have to be liberal... You are underestimating our power and ability to pass an order. We will cure you of this mistaken notion,” the bench orally observed.
The bench further said: “We will record your statement that the minister says because the ‘ Chief Minister is in custody, I cannot do anything’. We will give a finding. That you have placed your political interest on a higher pedestal. If any party does that, it’s wrong. This is what has been highlighted in this matter. We didn’t want to say it in this atmosphere. We have been trying to avoid it in the PILS. But now, you are asking for it.”
The bench, thereafter, reserved its decision, stating that it shall pass orders on April 29.