JOIN USThe ugly run-in in the Delhi power circles over the appointment of Shankuntala Gamlin as acting chief secretary in the Delhi government shows how Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, brimming with confidence due to his brute majority in the Assembly, is questioning a set of conventions on sharing of power with Lieutenant Governor Najeeb Jung in the Union Territory (UT).
Gamlin has assumed charge of new office despite Kejriwal’s displeasure, and proved that Jung is taller in stature than the CM in the UT, indirectly controlled by the Central government. Kejriwal’s cries demanding that the LG should function with the advice of the elected government – like the governors in other states – may sound like a warrior’s desperate attempt to raise an alarm.
However, constitutional experts feel what he is doing has never been attempted by former CMs like Sheila Dikshit of the Congress or M L Khurana of the BJP who knew their constitutional limitations. Creating a scenario of CM-LG confrontation and expressing helplessness over the wrongs committed over the decades seems to be Kejriwal’s tested strategy to corner sympathy of his voters, who take every word of their beloved CM as gospel truth.
When Kejriwal says that the LG should follow his advice on all issues, his supporters believe him without realising that law and order, land and police matters do not come under his domain.
When the CM slams the private power distribution companies, his supporters endorse his action as they presume he is fighting for their cause – without realising that Kejriwal as the head of the government is an equal partner in the functioning of the discoms in which the government holds 49 per cent stake.
Even the charges levelled by Kejriwal on Gamlin, who is also principal secretary (power), that she was trying to help the discoms owned by Reliance by preparing a letter of comfort (LoC) for taking loans, is misleading. The official was, perhaps, playing the role of a helpful partner to the discoms, of which the government is a stakeholder. Targeting Gamlin for the LoC issue, many say, is unfair. The BSES power companies (of Reliance) are managed by a board of directors, where four out of nine members are nominated by the Delhi government who are seniormost IAS officers.
If, by chance, the discoms default on payment to power generators due to non-availability of loans, Kejriwal cannot escape the responsibility for the blackout in the city. He cannot claim that the fault is entirely of the discoms because he too is a partner in the discoms and will have to share the burden of the power utilities’ failure. By imputing motives to Gamlin, the CM is trying to create an impression that the elected government’s ministers and the bureaucrats are separate wings of the Delhi government.
Kejriwal sprung to prominence with his campaign against the discoms during which he reconnected domestic power connections that were disconnected by the power utilities for non-payment of the “inflated” bills. The same populism and political compulsion is today preventing Kejriwal from aligning with the discoms – even when the situation demands so in public interest.
If the previous Delhi governments committed at the time of restructuring of the power sector in the city that they, as 49 per cent stakeholders in discoms, would help the power utilities in times of financial crisis, Kejriwal cannot rewrite the rules or agreements now and leave the discoms to fend for themselves. Thus, personal attacks by Kejriwal on Gamlin were unwarranted.
Gamlin has complained to the LG that she was threatened by an aide of Kejriwal to withdraw from the race for acting chief secretary or face public disclosures on her alleged proximity to the power utilities.
The 1984-batch IAS officer took the LG into confidence over the insinuation and proceeded with what was the best option of facilitating the LoC for the discoms so that they could get loans, repay debt of power generators and avoid power cuts in the city, as per the Supreme Court’s direction.
Proximity to discoms
Kejriwal chose to go public over Gamlin’s alleged proximity to discoms only when she was appointed by Jung against his wish. If he really had problems with her stand on LoC, he should have tried to proceed against her earlier, or suggested for her shifting from the power department.
Jung, while putting his weight behind Gamlin at the time of nominating her for the post, exposed Kejriwal’s double-speak on Gamlin’s performance.
“There was nothing on file submitted to the Lieutenant Governor that indicated that the government had anything against Gamlin,” said a Raj Niwas statement.
Clearly, Kejriwal is using all tricks to break free from the Centre’s indirect control over the city administration but without a parliamentary sanction, it is not possible. His supporters cannot wait till a law is enacted in parliament to redistribute powers between the LG and the elected government.
When Kejriwal decided not to send all the official files to Raj Niwas, Jung reminded him and the officials the constitutional fine print that mandates that all files relating to matters for which the Legislative Assembly can make law should come to the LG for final approval.
The tussle between Kejriwal and Jung over elevation of Gamlin and movement of files are manifestations of a bitter struggle whose seeds were, perhaps, sown during Kejriwal’s 49-day stint as CM in 2014.
During the February 2014 Assembly session, Jung had reminded the CM the rules that barred the tabling of the Jan Lokpal Bill without being cleared by the President, prompting Kejriwal to quit in protest, vowing to come back stronger and fight the “wrong” done to him.