Delhi vs Centre: AAP govt resorting to theatrics, Solicitor General to SC
The Solicitor General highlighted that "protests and theatrics cannot substitute court proceedings", adding that it is an embarrassment for Delhi as the world watches.
ANI
Jan 17, 2023 12:16 IST
New Delhi [India], January 17 (ANI): Solicitor General Tushar Mehta on Tuesday claimed that the Aam Aadmi Party was resorting to 'theatrics' and protests against the Lieutenant Governor when the question over the control of services in the national capital was pending adjudication before a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court.
The Solicitor General said that the "Constitutional functionaries are staging protests".
Mehta highlighted that "Protests and theatrics cannot substitute court proceedings", adding that such protests happening in Delhi are seen by the world and it becomes a matter of embarrassment.
The hearing over who controls services in the national capital -- Delhi government or Centre - is underway before a five-judge Constitution Bench headed by DY Chandrachud.
The Court had to decide on the legal issue concerning the scope of legislative and executive powers of the Centre and Delhi government over control of services in the national capital.
The case was slated to be heard by a Constitution Bench after a three-judge bench in May last year had decided to send it to a larger bench on a request by the Central government.
On February 14, 2019, a two-judge Bench of the top court delivered a split verdict on the question of powers of the Government of NCT of Delhi (GNCTD) and Union government over services and referred the matter to a three-judge Bench.
Prior to February 2019 judgement, a five-judge constitution bench of the Supreme Court had on July 4, 2018, laid down the broad parameters for governance of the national capital.
In the landmark verdict, it had unanimously held that Delhi cannot be accorded the status of a state but clipped the powers of the L-G saying he has no "independent decision-making power" and has to act on the aid and advice of the elected government.
It had restricted the jurisdiction of the L-G to matters pertaining to land, police and public order and on all other matters, it held that the L-G would have to act on the aid and advice of the council of ministers. (ANI)
Get the App
