The Supreme Court on Monday directed the inclusion of Lieutenant Governor (LG) of Delhi, VK Saxena on Delhi government’s plea challenging the constitutional validity of the Delhi Services Ordinance.
This ordinance grants overriding powers to the Lieutenant Governor (LG) of Delhi, empowering them to supervise the transfers and postings of civil servants in the national capital.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha also issued a notice to the Centre seeking its stand on the AAP government’s plea.
“We issue notice. Make it returnable after two weeks. LG of Delhi be impleaded as a party respondent and let the plea be amended accordingly,” the bench stated.
The Court also stated that it will address the plea for interim relief, including a stay on the ordinance and the Lieutenant Governor’s decision to terminate 437 consultants appointed by the Delhi government on July 17, 2023.
The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) government, in its plea, argued that the ordinance transfers control of civil servants in Delhi from the elected government to the unelected Lieutenant Governor, undermining the authority of the elected Delhi government.
The ordinance was issued in May, shortly after a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court declared that the Delhi government has the authority to govern all services, including Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officers, in the national capital.
In its ruling, the Supreme Court explicitly stated that the governance of elected state governments cannot be taken over by the Central government.
The plea filed through advocate Shadan Farasat before the Top Court argues that the ordinance:
- Violates the federal and democratic governance structure outlined in Article 239AA of the Constitution for the National Capital Territory of Delhi.
- Demonstrates blatant arbitrariness.
- Legislative attempts to overturn or review a judgment of the Constitution
- Represents an impermissible and unconstitutional misuse of the ordinance-making powers granted under Article 123 of the Constitution.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi argued that the ordinance provides unrestricted authority to the Chief Secretary of Delhi to defy the elected government of Delhi.
“Independent consultants hired by Oxford, Cambridge etc have been fired by the LG. How many times act of parliament has been stayed by this court let alone ordinance? How can a Constitution judgment be nullified,” Advocate Singhvi demanded.
He also requested a stay on the implementation of the ordinance. Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, representing the Central government, stated that the decision to terminate the consultants was made based on alarming facts.
During the hearing, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta stated that their decision to take action was based on shocking facts. In response, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi requested a stay and urged the court to schedule the matter for Friday, highlighting the impact of halted salary and pay.
SG countered by mentioning that the consultants themselves had not approached the court.
Singhvi clarified that as their employer, he had approached on their behalf.
SG further stated that one of the individuals appointed was the wife of an MLA, while others were party workers.
The bench then confirmed that the question of interim relief would be addressed on Monday.
SG then clarified that the relief sought was not related to the ordinance but specifically for the consultants.
The bench acknowledged Singhvi’s request for a stay on the ordinance, emphasizing the importance of not restricting that right. They indicated that they would review the matter and will hear the matter on Monday.
