Terming it a “mockery of the Constitution of India”, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) on Monday questioned the Lieutenant Governor Anil Baijal’s in-principle approval for restructuring the DASS Cadre and Stenographers Cadre of the Delhi government in exercise of his “so called powers” under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution.
‘No independent power’
Alleging that it was a “blatant attempt to subvert and thwart”, the recent decision of the Supreme Court which laid down “in clear terms that the L-G has no independent power”, AAP spokesperson Saurabh Bharadwaj alleged it was “another attempt to cling on to services so that the MHA continues to control Delhi government officers. “The hurried manner in which it has been done shows the desperation to grab the powers before the Supreme Court [SC] intervenes. Article 309 provides for the appropriate legislature to enact laws for recruitment and conditions of services of persons serving the Union or a State. The proviso to the Article states that until such a law is passed by the Assembly, the President in matters of the Union and the Governor in matters of a State, may make rules on these subjects,” Mr. Bharadwaj said.
He said that the Delhi Cabinet’s decision in this regard had argued for promotion up to level of additional secretary and de-linking from DANICS and a separate cadre for Delhi. He said the LG, however, allowed promotions up to joint secretary and that too to fewer posts and for the DASS to continue to be a “feeder cadre of DANICS under MHA.”
Arguing that the Article commences with the phrase, “subject to the provisions of this Constitution,” he said, it was subject to 239AA which states that there shall be a council of ministers to aid and advise the L-G.
‘Appropriate legislature’
The appropriate legislature, Mr. Bharadwaj argued, was the Delhi Assembly as was made clear by the SC. Thus, except for three subjects, all subjects fall under the legislative competence of the Delhi Assembly.
“Unfortunately the DASS Cadre had never been restructured since its inception in 1967 leading to stagnation and lack of promotional avenues. Ignoring the Cabinet Decision, the L-G constituted another Committee headed by S.N. Sahai, the then Finance Secretary. The Sahai Committee too submitted its report, which was again not even shown to the Council of Ministers,” he said.
