Hot Off The PressNews

Supreme Court: CJI Ranjan Gogoi has said that the Court will look into the plea of the Government of NCT of Delhi has sought constitution of a larger bench to expeditiously decide the issue of who controls the services in Delhi.

The bench of Dr. AK Sikri and Ashok Bhushan, JJ had, on February 14, put an end to ‘almost’ all the issues related to the powers exercisable by and functions of the elected Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) vis-a-vis the Central Government. However, the judges differed on the question relating to ‘Service matters’.

While both the judges agreed that Entry 41 of List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution is not available to the Delhi Legislative Assembly as Entry 41 of List II deals with ‘State Public Services’ and ‘State Public Service Commission’ and that State Public Service Commission does not exist in NCTD, they differed on the issue of power to transfer and appoint certain officers.

Justice Sikri Justice Bhushan
The transfers and postings of Secretaries, HODs and other officers in the scale of Joint Secretary to the Government of India and above can be done by the Lieutenant Governor and the file submitted to him directly. For other levels, including DANICS officers, the files can be routed through the Chief Minister to Lieutenant Governor. In case of difference of opinion between the Lieutenant Governor and the Chief Minister, the view of the Lieutenant Governor should prevail and the Ministry of Home Affairs can issue a suitable notification in this regard. I having held that Entry 41 of List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution is not available to the Legislative Assembly of GNCTD, there is no occasion to exercise any Executive power with regard to “Services” by the GNCTD, since the Executive power of the GNCTD as per Article 239AA(4) extend in relation to matters with respect to which Legislative Assembly has power to make laws. With regard to “Services” GNCTD can exercise only those Executive powers, which can be exercised by it under any law framed by the Parliament or it may exercise those Executive powers, which have been delegated to it.

To read the full report report on February 14 verdict, click here.

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: The bench of Dr. AK Sikri and Ashok Bhushan, JJ has put an end to ‘almost’ all the issues related to the powers exercisable by and functions of the elected Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) vis-a-vis the Central Government.

Difference on opinion on issue relating to ‘service’ matters:

While both the judges agreed that Entry 41 of List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution is not available to the Delhi Legislative Assembly as Entry 41 of List II deals with ‘State Public Services’ and ‘State Public Service Commission’ and that State Public Service Commission does not exist in NCTD, they differed on the issue of power to transfer and appoint certain officers.

 

 

Justice Sikri

 

Justice Bhushan

The transfers and postings of Secretaries, HODs and other officers in the scale of Joint Secretary to the Government of India and above can be done by the Lieutenant Governor and the file submitted to him directly. For other levels, including DANICS officers, the files can be routed through the Chief Minister to Lieutenant Governor. In case of difference of opinion between the Lieutenant Governor and the Chief Minister, the view of the Lieutenant Governor should prevail and the Ministry of Home Affairs can issue a suitable notification in this regard.

I having held that Entry 41 of List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution is not available to the Legislative Assembly of GNCTD, there is no occasion to exercise any Executive power with regard to “Services” by the GNCTD, since the Executive power of the GNCTD as per Article 239AA(4) extend in relation to matters with respect to which Legislative Assembly has power to make laws. With regard to “Services” GNCTD can exercise only those Executive powers, which can be exercised by it under any law framed by the Parliament or it may exercise those Executive powers, which have been delegated to it.

 

In the light of the aforementioned difference of opinion, a larger bench will be deciding the issue.

Concurrent opinions of the judges on other issues at a glance:

Setting up of Anti-Corruption Bureau Police Station

Centre

Setting up of Commission of Inquiry

Centre

Power to pass orders under Delhi Electricity Reforms Act, 2011 and Delhi Electricity Reforms (Transfer Schemes) Rules, 2001 appointing the nominee Directors on the Board of Electricity Distribution Companies

GNCTD

Power to revise the minimum rates of Agricultural Land (Circle Rates) under the provisions of Indian Stamp Act, 1899

GNCTD

However, the LG is also empowered to form its opinion ‘on any matter’ which may be different from the decision taken by his Ministers. In such circumstances, LG is supposed to refer the matter to the President for decision and act according to the decision given thereon by the President.

Appointment of Public Prosecutors under Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

GNCTD

 

Also read the related 5-judge Constitution Bench judgement that held that NCT of Delhi is not a State and Lt. Governor of Delhi is not an administrator.

[Govt. of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India, 2019 SCC OnLine SC 193, decided on 14.02.2019]

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: The Bench comprising of Madan B. Lokur, S. Abdul Nazeer and Deepak Gupta, JJ., in an order stated that the critical problem of “solid waste management” in Delhi certainly requires the active cooperation and assistance of the residents of Delhi.

The Bench on a careful reading of the report prepared by Ragini Jain and Almitra H. Patel in five volumes and considering the present situation of Delhi in regard to the solid waste management requested the Lt. Governor of Delhi to constitute a committee that would be responsible to go through the in-depth aspects of solid waste management in Delhi along with the cleaning of the dumpsites in Gazipur, Bhalswa, and Okhla. Further, the Court asked for the formation of a workable and implementable policy for the stated purpose.

The Supreme Court while directing the formation of the stated committee by the Lt. Governor asked them to not rush into taking any decision as the matter is of considerable importance. Also, the Committee was asked to be collaborative while the decision-making process would take place and in a manner that the cleanup mission brings a forward step instead of any hurdles for the said issue.

The matter was further listed for 27-08-2018 while asking the amicus curiae to suggest 4 to 5 people from the civil society who could be the member of the Committee. [Outrage as Parents End Life After Childs Dengue, In Re,2018 SCC OnLine SC 1016, Order dated 17-8-2018]

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: The Bench comprising of Madan B. Lokur and Deepak Gupta, JJ., addressed a PIL concerning the ‘Waste Management’ in Delhi.

The parties placed submissions that following kinds of waste are generated in houses, such as Wet Waste which is compostable, Dry Waste, Non-biodegradable, Biodegradable, Hazardous Waste and Construction and Building waste, and these are primarily the categories which need to be segregated for a proper waste management of solid waste in the city.

Another point discussed during the hearings was about the ‘pilot project’ that has been launched in some parts of Delhi, i.e. Green Park, Defence Colony, Maharani Bagh and Lajpat Nagar, for which the Supreme Court has asked for full details in regard to the project.

The Court has asked for furnishing the details by 14-08-2018 and has listed the matter on 17-08-2018.

Supreme Court has also notified that on the next date of hearing it would consider the submissions in regard to other alternative landfill sites as in Sonia Vihar and Ghonda Gujjran. [Outrage as Parents End Life After Childs Dengue, In Re 2018 SCC OnLine SC 823, order dated 06-08-2018]