Row Over Services: Will Examine If Parliament Can Abrogate C
Row Over Services: Will Examine If Parliament Can Abrogate Constitutional Principles Of Governance For Delhi, Says Supreme Court
|
The Supreme Court has said a five-judge constitution bench will examine whether Parliament can “abrogate the constitutional principles of governance” for the Delhi government by making a law to take away its control over services. The Centre recently issued an ordinance on the Delhi services matter by exercising its powers under Article 239-AA, a special provision in the Constitution pertaining to the national capital.
The top court, which on Thursday referred to a constitution bench the :
(i) What are the contours of the power of Parliament to enact a law under Article 239-AA(7); and (ii) Whether Parliament in the exercise of its power under Article 239-AA(7) can abrogate the constitutional principles of governance for the National Capital Territory of Delhi (NCTD),” said the order passed by a bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and justices P S Narasimha and Manoj Misra.
A 10-page order, penned by the CJI, said there were two preliminary issues which arose for the consideration by a larger bench.
“The first is on the import of Section 3A (of the ordinance). Section 3A removes Entry 41 (services) of List II (State List) from the legislative competence of the NCTD. On the exclusion of Entry 41 from the NCTD’s legislative power, the government of the NCTD ceases to have executive power over services because executive power is co-terminus with the legislative power,” the order said.
The issue, therefore, is whether a law could completely remove Delhi government’s executive power over services, it said, adding that the aspect of services under Entry 41 was also “interconnected with the validity of Section 3A” of the ordinance.
While referring the Delhi government’s plea to the constitution bench, it had rejected the vehement submission of the city dispensation that there was no need for referring the matter to a constitution bench as it will “paralyse the whole system” during its pendency.
On Thursday, the bench raised a raised a query with regard to the ordinance and said it took away the control of services from the control of the Delhi government.
The Constitution excludes three entries of List II (State List) related to police, law and order and land from the control of the Delhi government, it said.
“What you (Centre) have effectively done is that the Constitution says barring three entries, Delhi legislative assembly has the power. But, the ordinance takes away Entry 41 (services) (of the List II) also from the power. That is the effect of Section 3A of the ordinance,” the bench said.
The bench had recently issued notices to the Centre and the Delhi lieutenant governor on the plea while refusing to grant an interim stay on the ordinance on control over services in the national capial.
Article 239AA deals with special provisions with respect to Delhi in the Constitution and its sub-article 7 says, “Parliament may, by law, make provisions for giving effect to, or supplementing the provisions contained in the foregoing clauses and for all matters incidental or consequential thereto.”
It also says any such law made under the article “shall not be deemed to be an amendment of this Constitution for the purposes of Article 368 notwithstanding that it contains any provision which amends or has the effect of amending, this Constitution.”
The Centre had on May 19 promulgated the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Ordinance, 2023, to create an authority for transfer and posting of Group-A officers in Delhi.
Source
Source
Post Categories
Featured Posts
Latest Posts
Latest Posts
Legal Framework for Virtual Court Hearings: Challenges and Opportunities
The advent of virtual court hearings marks a significant evolution in the judicial system, reshaping traditional courtroom dynamics. While this shift brings efficiency and accessibility, it also introduces unique challenges and opportunities that require careful consideration within the legal framework. ...
Supreme Court Dismisses PIL Seeking Independent Audit Of EVM Source Codes
The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking an independent audit of source codes of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs). The bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra noted that ...
Judicial Decorum vs. Legal Expression: Balancing Dissent with Discipline in India’s Courtrooms
🏛️ The Incident That Sparked a National Conversation The recent events in the Supreme Court of India have reignited a fundamental debate — where does a lawyer’s right to expression end and duty to maintain decorum begin? A courtroom is ...
The Supreme Court’s Ruling on Same-Sex Marriage: What’s Next?
As legal professionals, we recognize the profound implications of the Supreme Court of India's recent deliberations on same-sex marriage. While the Court refrained from granting full marriage equality, the discussions have paved the way for significant legal discourse on LGBTQ+ ...
36-48 Hours Shifts For Resident Doctors Inhuman: Supreme Court Asks NTF To Address Concerns On Duty Hours
During the Suo Motu hearing of the RG Kar Hospital Rape-Murder today, the Supreme Court expressed its worries over the 'inhuman working hours' of resident doctors all over the country. The bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices ...
Cross-Border Succession Planning: What Global Indian Families Must Fix in 2026
Protecting Wealth Across Borders Requires More Than Just a Will. Global Indian families are increasingly building wealth beyond geographical boundaries. A business in India, investment portfolios in the UAE, real estate in the UK, children settled in the United States, ...
Speak With Our
Get a Appointment