Supreme Court judge, Justice J.S. Khehar, recused himself on Monday from hearing a petition filed by the Arvind Kejriwal-led AAP government seeking clarity on the scope and boundaries of the constitutional relationship between it and the Centre in administering the National Capital.
The recusal preceded the CBI arrest of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's Principal secretary on corruption charges as tensions escalated between the Delhi government and the Centre.
Justice Khehar, who headed a Bench comprising Justice Arun Mishra, said the case would be referred back to Chief Justice of India T.S. Thakur for assigning it to another Bench.
The case is now listed for hearing before a Bench headed by Justice Anil Dave on Tuesday, July 5.
The atmosphere in the courtroom suddenly became charged when Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi, who first extended the Centre's co-operation and consent to have the case heard on Tuesday, suddenly withdrew his consent on being upset with certain submissions made by senior advocate Indira Jaising for the Delhi government.
Tempers were cooled when Justice Khehar, in a light aside, told Mr. Rohatgi that “once you give a consent to a woman, you should not withdraw”.
The Delhi government, in the present case, has filed a special leave petition against Delhi High Court's decision on May 24 to reserve its verdict on the stand-off between Lieutenant Governor Najeeb Jung and the Kejriwal government over who has authority to appoint bureaucrats in the Capital.
It has contended that the tussle between the Centre and the Delhi government is a “federal” dispute which the apex court, not the Delhi High Court, should decide.
The tensions between the NDA government and Mr. Kejriwal have affected every arm of governance in Delhi over the past months even as about a dozen petitions lie pending in the High Court in which they contest each other's right to administer and govern the National Capital.
On May 21, 2015, the Union Ministry of Home Affairs endowed Mr. Jung with absolute powers to appoint bureaucrats much to the trepidation of the AAP government, which had filed a writ petition seeking a judicial declaration that the fiat was “ultra vires of the Constitution” and “clearly bad in law”.
Mentioning before Chief Justice Thakur's Bench on Friday last, Ms. Jaising had submitted that the Delhi government was unable to function independently as a “full State” and the Centre's interference has led to a virtual paralysis. She further said that the dispute was centred on the powers of Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi under Article 239A of the Constitution.
The Delhi government had also filed an original suit in the Supreme Court seeking a final resolution on questions of distribution of legislative and (co-extensive) executive powers between the Centre, represented by Mr. Jung, and the Delhi government under Article 239AA.
