 "Centre-Delhi govt turf war: SC, HC hear separate rival petitions")
Instead, the HC directed that all proposals of work allocation to bureaucrats made by the elected government be forwarded to the Lieutenant Governor (L-G), the Centre’s monitor, for him to “deliberate”.
This also implies that the Kejriwal government would need to forward all recent appointments and transfers of bureaucrats to the L-G.
More From This Section
The court issued a notice to the Centre on the city government’s petition alleging that the notification giving the L-G sole power on appointments and transfers of officers was “unconstitutional”. It asked the Centre for information and data on whether Union Territitories had in the past been allowed to post or move bureaucrats.
Senior advocate Indira Jaising, appearing for the Kejriwal government, argued that in view of the Union ministry notification, officers were not reporting for duty where they were posted and government operations were at a standstill. “Job allocation is my (chief minister’s) prerogative. That is governance. One runs a government through its officers; therefore, we need to have the power to allocate them work as per our wish,” Jaising said. “The heart of the matter is that he (L-G and Centre) wants to act as an autocrat.”
“You both (governments) say you have the power. It needs to be determined,” the court said, posting the matter for August 11.
And, at the Supreme Court, there was a hearing on the Union’s plea against the recent Delhi HC order (from a single judge’s bench) for restoring power to the Delhi government’s anti-corruption bureau (ACB) to probe central government officers. The SC said it would not stay the HC’s observations, terming as “suspect” the recent Centre’s notification clipping the powers of the Kejriwal government. The bench said these were “only tentative in nature” and did not express any opinion on its validity.
However, it told the HC to hear the Kejriwal government's petition referred to earlier, on discretion to the L-G in appointing bureaucrats, “independently” and without being influenced by the single judge’s observations. Solicitor General Ranjit Kumar urged for a stay of the observations and the SC bench said this would be considered after the reply was filed by the Delhi government in three weeks.
The Centre has also challenged the HC ruling on the grounds that it was passed without the Centre’s point of view being heard. The HC had made these observations while dismissing the bail application of a police head constable, arrested by the ACB on a corruption charge.
Meanwhile, the apex court also issued a notice answerable within six weeks to the Kejriwal government on the main appeal filed by the home ministry against the observations of the HC that the L-G was barred from acting on his own discretion.