Supreme Court’s question to the Center: When the central government has control over big officers, then what is the meaning of the elected government in Delhi

A hearing was held in the Supreme Court in the matter of administrative control over the transfers and postings of senior officers of Delhi. During this, the court questioned the necessity of having an elected government in Delhi. The court asked the Center what is the point of having an elected government in Delhi when its administrative control is with the central government.

A five-judge constitution bench headed by CJI Chandrachud heard the Centre-Delhi government dispute on control of services for the third day on Thursday. During this, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said that a Union Territory like Delhi is an extension of the Union, which is administered by the Central Government through its officers. On this, the court asked that if everything in Delhi is going on at the behest of the Centre, then what is the use of an elected government?

Delhi is a metropolitan city
During the hearing, a bench of Justices MR Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and PS Narasimha also referred to the issues on which the Delhi government has been unable to legislate and the legal and constitutional position with regard to regulation of services in the national capital. asked about

To this, Mehta said that being the national capital, Delhi has a unique status and citizens of all the states living there should have a sense of belonging. Citing a judgement, he said- Delhi is a metropolitan city and a miniature India.

Delhi’s LG Saxena and CM Kejriwal have already been at loggerheads over several issues.

Solicitor General said – some rights are shared
The bench asked- If Parliament has legislative control over certain areas, then what about the executive powers of the Delhi government. The court wanted the Solicitor General to explain how legislative control of services was never part of Delhi’s legislative powers. The Solicitor General said- some powers are shared and the functional control of the officers will always be with the locally elected government.

He said that if any officer is not performing his role as expected, the Delhi government will have no power to transfer him and appoint someone else. The bench said- can you say that they will not have any jurisdiction where they should be posted.

Next hearing on January 17
The law officer referred to Delhi’s status as the national capital and gave examples to substantiate why the Center needed to control the services. Suppose the central government posts an officer and as per a policy of the Delhi government he starts non-cooperating with another state then there will be a problem.

Further, whenever a request is made in respect of an officer, the Lieutenant Governor takes action, he said, adding that the power rests with the central government. They are appointed through All India Act and examinations conducted by UPSC. He said- There is no separate cadre for union territories. As far as the Delhi administration is concerned, there are three tiers – All India Services, DANICS and DANIPS and DAS.

For the first two levels, the appointment is done by the UPSC. Referring to the constitutional scheme, he said that there are Central and State Services and there is no Public Service Commission in the Union Territories. The next hearing in this matter will be on January 17.