Day One of the dual court battles between the Centre and the Aam Aadmi Party government over the Union Home Ministry’s May 21 notification giving absolute powers to the Lieutenant-Governor turned out to be a draw, with neither side scoring brownie points over the other.
While the Supreme Court refused to stay the Delhi High Court judge’s remarks calling the May 21 notification “suspect,” the Delhi High Court declined the AAP government’s request to stay the notification itself.
On Friday, a vacation Bench of Justices A.K. Sikri and U.U. Lalit said they cannot grant stay until they get to consider what the Delhi government has to say.
The AAP government was then given three weeks to counter the Centre’s plea to stay the High Court judge’s observations that the Centre employed this “suspect” executive fiat to usurp the Delhi government's governance powers.
‘Tentative’ The apex court acknowledged the Centre’s submission that these comments should not have been made without hearing the Centre first. But it sought to smooth ruffled feathers by clarifying in its order that the judge’s comments were only “tentative” in nature and not an opinion on the validity of the notification.
Having said this, the apex court concluded the hearing by leaving it to the Delhi High Court to consider the legality of the May 21 fiat with a fresh mind and “independently.”
The scene of battle shifted to the Delhi High Court in the afternoon.
Here, Justice Rajiv Shakdher refused to stay the May 21 notification even as the AAP government argued in its petition that the fiat was “ultra vires of the Constitution” and “clearly bad in law.”
Instead, the High Court simply issued notice to the Centre to file its response by August 11.
Justice Shakhdher, in what seems to be an interim balancing act, said the Council of Ministers can put forward requests for postings of bureaucrats, which the L-G would consider and decide.
The court further provided that in case any difference of opinion crops up, the L-G can seek a reference from the President. This arrangement would continue till the High Court decides the writ petition, the judge said.
