Live
- 178 Drivers turned up on the first day for and Eye Check-up Camp hosted by the IRB Golconda Expressway
- A star beyond the screen celebrates another year of excellence
- Russell stunned with pole in Las Vegas, says 'Got to deep dive into why we’re so quick'
- BJP hijacked electoral machinery for securing victory in Maharashtra: Cong
- Guwahati to host Indian National Rally Sprint Championship on Sunday
- Priyanka will now be seen in Wayanad more often: Robert Vadra
- Cong won all 3 seats on basis of guarantees, development: Dy CM on K’taka bypolls
- Santosh Trophy: Odisha rout Chhattisgarh to make final rounds
- BJP hijacked electoral machinery for securing victory in Maharashtra: Cong
- Formula 1: Russell pips Sainz to take pole in Las Vegas GP
SC verdict on Delhi-Centre power tussle likely today
The Supreme Court is likely to pronounce a crucial verdict on Wednesday on a batch of appeals filed by the Arvind Kejriwal-led Delhi government challenging the Delhi High Court\'s order holding the Lieutenant Governor (LG) as the administrative head of the national capital.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court is likely to pronounce a crucial verdict on Wednesday on a batch of appeals filed by the Arvind Kejriwal-led Delhi government challenging the Delhi High Court's order holding the Lieutenant Governor (LG) as the administrative head of the national capital.
A five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, which had commenced hearing in the matter on November 2 last year, had reserved its verdict on December 6, 2017.
The AAP dispensation had argued before the apex court bench, which also comprised Justices A K Sikri, A M Khanwilkar, D Y Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan, that it possessed both the legislative and executive powers.
It had said that the chief minister and the council of ministers had the legislative power to make laws as well as the executive authority to enforce the enacted statutes. The AAP government had argued that the LG has been taking many executive decisions and a "harmonious interpretation" of Article 239AA of the Constitution was needed to fulfil the constitutional mandate for a democratically-elected Delhi government.
The article deals with power and status of Delhi. The Centre had contended before the bench that Delhi government cannot have the "exclusive" executive powers as it would be against national interests and referred to the 1989 Balakrishnan committee report that had dealt with the reasons for not granting status of a state to Delhi.
It had also argued that several "illegal" notifications were issued by the Delhi government and they were challenged in the high court. The Centre had referred to the Constitution, the 1991 Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Act and the Transaction of Business of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Rules to drive home the point that the President, the Union government and the LG had supremacy over city dispensation in administering the national capital.
On the other hand, the Delhi government had accused the LG of making a "mockery of democracy", saying he was either taking decisions of an elected government or substituting them without having any power.
During the arguments, the apex court had said it would only lay down the principles on the status of the national capital under the Constitution and not deal with issues arising out of individual notifications issued by the Delhi government on matters like the 'mohalla clinics' and regularisation of guest teachers.
The high court, in its August 4, 2016 verdict, had said that LG is the administrative head of National Capital Territory and AAP government's contention that he is bound to act on advice of Council of Ministers was "without substance".
While battery of senior lawyers -- P Chidambaram, Gopal Subramanium, Rajeev Dhavan, Indira Jaising -- had argued for the Arvind Kejriwal government, the NDA government at the Centre was represented by Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Maninder Singh in the marathon proceedings.
