Advertisement

Arvind Kejriwal-Najeeb Jung tussle: Delhi HC observations on Centre’s order `tentative`, says SC

Both the Centre and the Delhi Government on Friday failed to get total relief from courts in their current battle over AAP government's right to appoint senior bureaucrats to key posts.

New Delhi: Both the Centre and the Delhi Government on Friday failed to get total relief from courts in their current battle over AAP government's right to appoint senior bureaucrats to key posts.

While the Supreme Court refused to stay the observations of the Delhi High Court, which had termed as "suspect" the recent Centre's notification clipping powers of the AAP government, the High Court did not stay or quash the Centre's notification barring Delhi government's jurisdiction over central officials.

The apex court said that the Delhi High Court observations in its May 25 order were "only tentative in nature" without expressing any opinion on its validity.

It also suggested that the matter from Delhi High Court could also be transferred to it so that there was a finality on the issue.

A Bench of justices AK Sikri and UU Lalit, however, decided to examine the Centre's challenge to May 25 High Court order on the jurisdiction of NCT government's anti-corruption branch (ACB) to arrest policemen.

The court, which noted that the AAP Government has filed a fresh petition in the High Court against the May 21 notification giving discretion to the Lieutenant Governor in appointing bureaucrats, directed the HC to hear it independently without being influenced by the observations made by the single judge on the notification.

"However, insofar as observations made in para 66 are concerned, we find that they pertain to Notification issued on May 21, 2015 which was issued after the judgement was reserved by the High Court. Neither the Union of India was party who had issued this Notification nor was there any occasion to any hearing on the said Notification.

"We are also informed that this Notification has been challenged by the Delhi Government by filing the Writ Petition in the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.

"We, therefore, clarify that the observations made therein were only tentative in nature without expressing any opinion on the validity of Notification dated May 21, 2015 and it would be open to the High Court to deal with the said petition independently without being influenced by any observations made in para 66, or for that matter in other paragraphs of the impugned order," the SC bench said.

Meanwhile, the battle was also fought in the Delhi High Court which did not grant either a stay or quash the Centre's notification clipping AAP administration's powers.

However, it directed the Lt Governor to "deliberate" on the city government's proposals on appointment of senior bureaucrats to key posts.

Hearing the Delhi government's plea for quashing the May 21 order of the Centre barring the anti-corruption branch from proceeding against any staff under Centre's control, the court, as an interim measure, asked the LG to deliberate upon the AAP government's orders shifting nine bureaucrats from one post to another.

It also sought the Centre's response on AAP government's plea seeking quashing of a notification which gave the Lt Governor absolute powers to appoint bureaucrats to various posts in the national capital.

Justice Rajiv Shakdher gave the interim order after senior advocate Indira Jaising, appearing for the Delhi government, suggested the via media to break the "conundrum".

She said the government will send its proposal for allocating different posts to the LG, who can then follow the procedure laid down in the Transaction of Business Rules.

Jaising argued that in view of the notification the officers were not reporting for duty where they were posted and as a result running of government has come to a stand still.

"They (Centre) can't short circuit the procedure provided under the Rules and the Constitution," she said.

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Sanjay Jain opposed the suggestion saying the city government was "inherently ineligible" for "tweaking or tinkering" with the officers allocated to it by the Centre which decides where they have to be posted.

He also said that when the city government did not have the power to give an opinion on the issue, then the question of sending the proposal to the LG does not arise.