L-G bound by ‘aid and advice’ of Delhi govt., says Constitution Bench

L-G bound by ‘aid and advice’ of Delhi govt., says Constitution Bench

News:

1. The Supreme Court in its judgment over power tussle between Delhi government and LG, held that lieutenant governor is bound by the “aid and advice” of the Delhi government.

Important facts:

2. Issues involved:

• After its victory in 2015 in Assembly elections, the AAP government has clashed with the L-G over appointments, file clearances and control of the police department, which reports to the Centre.
• The Delhi government had argued that the legislative powers of the L-G, as a delegate of the President, is limited compared with those possessed by the Delhi Assembly.

3. However, the centre government argued that the Delhi government was at best meant to take care of the “daily utilities” of the Capital and the “real power to administrate the national capital” was vested with the President and the Union of India.

4. The Delhi government refers the matter to the Delhi High Court. The HC ruled that:

• The court had declared that the LG has “complete control of all members regarding NCT of Delhi and nothing will happen without the concurrence of the LG.
• The court ruled that Delhi is a Union Territory and the Lieutenant Governor its administrative head.

5. Recent judgment of the Supreme Court came on appeals filed by the Delhi government against the 2016 HC verdict.

6. Now, the apex court in its verdict held that :

• The LG has not entrusted with any independent power and bound by aid and advice of council of ministers.
• The LG refer the dispute to the President for a final decision without sitting over it
• The LG is bound to implement the decision taken by the President on a reference being made by him
• The court ruled that government of Delhi cannot rest upon the whims of one functionary- the LG.
• The court ruled that the Lieutenant-Governor should act as a “facilitator” for good governance in the national capital and not as an “obstructionist”
• The court said that LG cannot exercise his discretion in daily governance.
• His discretionary powers are limited to only matters in the State List — public order, police and land — over which the legislative power of the Delhi Legislative Assembly stand excluded under Article 239AA
• The court said the L-G cannot be given the status of a “State Governor”.

7. CJI quotes from the 1987 Balakishan report to conclude that ‘Delhi is not a state’. The report emphasized on the following points:

• Delhi could not have a situation in which the national capital had “two governments run by different political parties. Such conflict may prejudice national interest”.
• The SC bench in its judgment excerpts from the report which said, Delhi as the national capital belongs to the nation as a whole”.
• The report said that if Delhi becomes a full-fledged state, there would be a Constitution and division of sovereign, legislative, and executive powers between the Union and the State of Delhi.
• Parliament would have limited legislative access.
• The control of the union over Delhi was vital in the national interest.
• It dealt extensively with the modifications in the aid and advice given by the Council of Minister to the administration of Delhi.
• The report also pointed out that LG’s role was not that of a Constitutional figurehead, though the ultimate responsibility for good administration of Delhi was vested in the President acting through administrator.