ForumIAS announcing GS Foundation Program for UPSC CSE 2025-26 from 27th May. Click Here for more information.
Source: This post is created based on the article
“Asymmetry, power”, published in The Hindu on 13th May 2023.
“Supreme Court’s Delhi verdict carries promise of a constitutional renaissance” published in Indian Express on 13th May 2023.
Syllabus Topic: GS Paper 2, issues associated with federalism in India.
News: The article provides and analysis of the SC judgment in the Delhi case
Asymmetric federalism has been a key positive feature of India’s polity, but it hasn’t always ensured peaceful relations between the Centre and its constituent units. The ongoing disagreement between the Union government and the Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) serves as a prime example. The Supreme Court has frequently intervened to clarify the governance parameters of the territory.
SC Ruling in the Delhi Case
Read – The SC ruling in the LG Vs Delhi Government case
What is the significance of SC ruling in the Delhi Case?
In the judgement, SC emphasised on the sui generis (unique) nature of Delhi and stated that the Union Territory’s status should not be used to curtail the role of the elected government.
The verdict reinforces the principle that a representative regime shouldn’t be undermined by an unelected administrator.
The judgement reaffirms Thomas Jefferson’s idea that “just government should derive its powers from the consent of the governed”.
It emphasises that the central government has a significant mandate, but its consent is to govern the country, not Delhi. Delhi’s elected representatives have a more legitimate constitutional right to govern.
The Court maintained that Union Territories (UTs) with their own legislative assemblies should be treated akin to states. The judgment dismissed the idea of a homogenous class of UTs.
Justice Chandrachud emphasised the importance of federalism in a diverse country like India. He argued that recognising regional aspirations strengthens the unity of the country.
The Court disagreed with the argument that the Constitution has strong unitary features in respect of UTs. Quoting B. R. Ambedkar, it reiterated that the Indian Constitution is neither a league of states nor are the states administrative units or agencies of the government. Instead, the Centre and states under the Constitution are co-equals.
