<p>The Supreme Court’s ruling that the Delhi government has legislative and administrative powers over the administrative services in the national capital is a win for federalism and for the supremacy of the people’s will in a representative democracy. It will hopefully put an end to the unseemly fights between the Arvind Kejriwal government and the Lieutenant-Governor of Delhi. The verdict empowers the elected government of Delhi in matters of governance and underlines the limited role that the Lt-Governor has in its administration. In 2015, the Union Home Ministry had notified that the Lt-Governor shall exercise control over the “services” in Delhi. The notification was challenged, and its various aspects have been subjected to scrutiny by different Supreme Court benches. In 2018, a Constitution Bench unanimously ruled that the “Delhi L-G was bound by the aid and advice of the elected government, and both needed to work harmoniously with each other”, but it did not touch upon the issue of control over the bureaucracy and services. The five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud has now settled the various matters that came up in the past judgements and given a clear verdict. It has ruled that the bureaucrats have to report to the elected government, except in matters related to policing, public order, and land, which belong to the Centre’s domain in the scheme of governance of Delhi. </p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/national-politics/twin-sc-verdicts-on-delhi-and-maharashtra-booster-for-opposition-against-modi-govt-1217750.html" target="_blank">Twin SC verdicts on Delhi and Maharashtra booster for Opposition against Modi govt</a></strong></p>.<p>While the central government insisted that it needed “the power to make transfers and postings of officers in Delhi on account of it being the national capital”, the court held that “if a democratically elected government is not given the power to control the officers, the principle of accountability will be redundant”, and that “if the officers stop reporting to the ministers or do not abide by their directions, the principle of collective responsibility is affected.” It also held that the federal system of governance and the principle of representative democracy would be abrogated if the Centre took over the executive powers of an elected government. The court observed that “the permanent executive, consisting of unelected civil service officers …may act in ways that disregard the will of the electorate”. </p>.<p>These are the first principles of elective democracy and federalism, but they had to be reiterated through judicial orders. The AAP government of Delhi and the BJP government at the Centre have been in a state of constant conflict over postings and transfers of officers, implementation of policies and programmes, and many other matters. This is an aggravated form of the conflict that Governors and governments of non-BJP states have been witnessing. The Centre should abide by the judgement and ensure that it is implemented in letter and spirit. </p>
<p>The Supreme Court’s ruling that the Delhi government has legislative and administrative powers over the administrative services in the national capital is a win for federalism and for the supremacy of the people’s will in a representative democracy. It will hopefully put an end to the unseemly fights between the Arvind Kejriwal government and the Lieutenant-Governor of Delhi. The verdict empowers the elected government of Delhi in matters of governance and underlines the limited role that the Lt-Governor has in its administration. In 2015, the Union Home Ministry had notified that the Lt-Governor shall exercise control over the “services” in Delhi. The notification was challenged, and its various aspects have been subjected to scrutiny by different Supreme Court benches. In 2018, a Constitution Bench unanimously ruled that the “Delhi L-G was bound by the aid and advice of the elected government, and both needed to work harmoniously with each other”, but it did not touch upon the issue of control over the bureaucracy and services. The five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud has now settled the various matters that came up in the past judgements and given a clear verdict. It has ruled that the bureaucrats have to report to the elected government, except in matters related to policing, public order, and land, which belong to the Centre’s domain in the scheme of governance of Delhi. </p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/national-politics/twin-sc-verdicts-on-delhi-and-maharashtra-booster-for-opposition-against-modi-govt-1217750.html" target="_blank">Twin SC verdicts on Delhi and Maharashtra booster for Opposition against Modi govt</a></strong></p>.<p>While the central government insisted that it needed “the power to make transfers and postings of officers in Delhi on account of it being the national capital”, the court held that “if a democratically elected government is not given the power to control the officers, the principle of accountability will be redundant”, and that “if the officers stop reporting to the ministers or do not abide by their directions, the principle of collective responsibility is affected.” It also held that the federal system of governance and the principle of representative democracy would be abrogated if the Centre took over the executive powers of an elected government. The court observed that “the permanent executive, consisting of unelected civil service officers …may act in ways that disregard the will of the electorate”. </p>.<p>These are the first principles of elective democracy and federalism, but they had to be reiterated through judicial orders. The AAP government of Delhi and the BJP government at the Centre have been in a state of constant conflict over postings and transfers of officers, implementation of policies and programmes, and many other matters. This is an aggravated form of the conflict that Governors and governments of non-BJP states have been witnessing. The Centre should abide by the judgement and ensure that it is implemented in letter and spirit. </p>
