New Delhi:Union home minister Amit Shah on Tuesday cited the Supreme Court’s May 11 judgment to counter the Opposition’s objections in the Lok Sabha to the introduction of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Bill, 2023 that replaces an ordinance promulgated on May 19.
The bill aims to replace an ordinance promulgated on May 19 to allow the Centre to retain control over the bureaucracy in Delhi and effectively overrides a May 11 Supreme Court judgment, which handed the charge of the Capital’s bureaucracy to the elected government, excluding departments connected to police, public order and land.
Shah dismissed the Opposition’s effort to question Parliament’s legislative competence to discuss the bill, saying it was a “political” move. Shah cited a para of the Supreme Court’s May 11 verdict which referred to the legislative competence of the assembly and Parliament.
“The Legislative Assembly of NCTD has competence over entries in List II and List III except for the expressly excluded entries of List II. In addition to the Entries in List I, Parliament has legislative competence over all matters in List II and List III in relation to NCTD, including the entries which have been kept out of the legislative domain of NCTD by virtue of Article 239AA(3)(a),” the verdict’s Para 164 [c] said.
Shah also underlined that Article 249 of the Constitution empowered Parliament to even make laws in respect of a matter in the State list in the national interest. According to Article 249: “Parliament should make laws with respect to any matter enumerated in the State List specified in the resolution, it shall be lawful for Parliament to make laws for the whole or any part of the territory of India with respect to that matter while the resolution remains in force.”
Shah’s intervention – the minister of state for home affairs Nityanand Rai moved the bill for introduction – came after several opposition leaders objected to the bill’s introduction.
Congress leader Adhir Chowdhury said the bill “vindicates the outrageous infringement of the powers of the Delhi govt” and claimed the Union Government is making a “graveyard of cooperative federalism.”
“This bill takes away the power to make laws for service. The Delhi government should have the power to make laws in services. It raises serious concerns about the Centre’s intention. This bill aims to offset the SC verdict. This bill expands the power of the LG,” Chowdhury alleged.
Parliamentary affairs minister Pralhad Joshi maintained that the leaders could only talk about the competence of the bill, RSP MP NK Premachandran said, “I am questioning legislative competence. The bill is against the principles of federalism. If an elected government doesn’t have any administrative and bureaucratic control, then what is the purpose of having a government?”
AIMIM leader Asaduddin Owaisi said it “violates Article 123 (about the President’s power to promulgate an ordinance when Parliament is in recess) and the theory of separation of power”. Owaisi sought division on the introduction of the bill.
Saugata Ray of the Trinamool Congress complained that the services bill was outside the legislative competence of the government as it was brought to override the Supreme Court judgement. Ray said the government was attempting “total abrogation of the power of Delhi government”.
Congress leader Gaurav Gogoi, who labelled the bill as “unconstitutional”, and DMK leader TR Balu argued that no substantive motion could be brought till the Lok Sabha takes up the no-confidence motion that was requested last week. The no-confidence motion is scheduled to be taken up on August 8.
Congress leader Shashi Tharoor argued that the bill undermines the Delhi assembly and the Supreme Court judgment. “If the Delhi government is not able to control or hold officers accountable, a government can’t function,” he said.
Biju Janata Dal (BJD) leader Pinaki Mishra indicated his party’s support for the bill and countered the Opposition over the issue of legislative competence. “The government has brought a law pursuant to the Supreme Court’s judgment. How can you challenge its legislative competence? On a point of law, you can’t challenge the introduction of this bill,” he told Opposition leaders.
