SC Favoured Delhi’s Government: In the recent verdict over 7 years old tussles between state and central government over bureaucracy’s control, the Supreme Court of India ( SCI) verdicts that it is constitutional to let democratically elected state representatives have control over state machinery , against a centre government, who had no direct relationship with it (state machinery)and who is overburden with national issues. The 5 benched judicial body headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud commented “If a democratically elected government is not allowed to control its officers and hold them to account, then its responsibility towards legislature and the public is diluted. if an officer is not responding to government the collective responsibility is diluted… If officers feel they are insulated to the elected government, they feel they are not accountable”.
SC Favoured Delhi’s Government: What was the legal battle
The legal battle involved the dispute over who controls the bureaucracy in the capital city of Delhi, India. The case revolves around the interpretation of Article 239AA, which delineates the legislative and executive powers of the Delhi government, while clarifying that land, police, and public order remain under the exclusive domain of the Centre. The legal battle was centered around a dispute between the Lieutenant Governor (LG) and the elected government in the National Capital Territory of Delhi (NCTD) in India. The disagreement was over who had the authority to control the Capital’s bureaucracy. The incumbent party (AAP government) claimed that they should had the power to control the bureaucrats in the capital, while the Centre argued that the LG had the final say. The issue was centered around the delineation of powers between the two power centers and the interpretation of Article 239AA, which set out the legislative and executive powers of the Delhi government.
What are its implication
The legal battle over control of Delhi’s bureaucracy has significant economic, political, and social implications in India. The dispute highlights the ongoing tensions between the federal government and state governments over the distribution of power and resources. The legal battle over the control of the Delhi bureaucracy has implications in the economic, political, and social spheres in India. The central government’s attempt to limit the powers of the Delhi government may have economic consequences, as it could affect the efficiency and effectiveness of the bureaucracy in the capital. This could, in turn, impact the delivery of public services to the people of Delhi, which may have an adverse effect on the lives of the citizens.The AAP government’s claim to have the power to control bureaucrats in the capital is based on the premise that the people of Delhi have elected them to govern and that they should have the power to make decisions on their behalf. However, the Centre’s efforts to limit their power suggest that they do not trust the elected government to make these decisions, which could undermine the democratic process. The social implications of the legal battle are also worth considering. Delhi is one of India’s most populous and diverse cities, with a significant number of marginalized communities. Any disruption in the delivery of public services could have a significant impact on these communities, exacerbating existing inequalities and increasing social tensions. The legal battle over control of Delhi’s bureaucracy highlights the need for greater cooperation and collaboration between the central and state governments to ensure that the needs of all citizens are met.
