 "elhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal addresses a press conference at old secretariat")
In a setback to the ruling Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) here, the high court has quashed the Arvind Kejriwal government's appointment of 21 of its legislators as parliamentary secretaries.
The order came on a day when Navjot Singh Sidhu, former member of Parliament till he left the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), and who until recently was in negotiations to join the AAP, alleged Kejriwal wanted only "yes-men". He dubbed the AAP "anarchy in the garb of democracy" while launching a non-political Awaaz-e-Punjab front.
Kejriwal, he said, was insecure and had suggested Sidhu shouldn't contest elections, while his wife would be made a minister if the AAP formed a government in Punjab.
On Thursday, too, Kejriwal arrived in Punjab for the AAP's campaign in the coming assembly polls. The AAP in Punjab is battling dissidence and allegations of sleaze and corruption. Kejriwal, manhandled allegedly by Congress and BJP workers in Ludhiana and at the Delhi railway station, said more muck was likely to be thrown at the party in the run-up to the elections.
At the high court here, a bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Sangita Dhingra Sehgal announced a verdict setting aside the appointment of 21 parliamentary secretaries by the AAP government. Earlier, counsel for the Delhi government "conceded" the March 13, 2015, order was issued without taking concurrence or views of the city's lieutenant governor (LG).
Thursday's order comes about a month after the court had held that the LG's concurrence was mandatory in Delhi's administrative affairs, being executive head of the Union Territory.
That August 4 adjudication arose after disagreements between the Centre and the AAP government led to a series of petitions questioning the role of the LG in Delhi's administrative matters.
Thursday's order by the court was on a petition from a non-government body that the CM had made the 'unconstitutional and illegal' appointments in violation of the Constitution and Transaction of Business of Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi Rules, 1993.
During the proceedings, (the Centre's) Additional Solicitor General Sanjay Jain informed the court the Election Commission of India had also taken the issue into consideration. The central government had opposed the appointments on July 13, saying such posts (except of parliamentary secretary to the CM), did not find mention in the Constitution or the Delhi Members of Legislative Assembly (Removal of Disqualification) Act of 1997.
In an affidavit submitted to the HC, the Union ministry of home affairs had stated the city government tried to legalise the appointments by making amendments to the Act but as the President did not give his assent to the changes, the selections were 'not covered by the law'.
The AAP government had previously defended its stance by arguing the selections were made to assist ministers and ensure smooth functioning of the legislative assembly. And, that no additional hierarchies had been created and the parliamentary secretaries would not have access to any confidential documents within ministerial purview.
