Manas Dasgupta
NEW DELHI, Nov 24: In a bid to evade yet another tussle between the Aam Aadmi Party government in Delhi and the BJP government-appointed Lieutenant Governor over the control of bureaucrats in the national capital, the Supreme Court on Friday intervened to find a way out over the selection of the next chief secretary of the Delhi government.
This comes after the Delhi AAP government moved the court against the centre extending the tenure of the current Chief Secretary – Naresh Kumar, who is due to retire on November 30, or appointing a new official. The challenge was against the backdrop of the contentious ordinance that gave the centre control over posting of bureaucrats, and the Delhi government had argued such appointments could not be made without it being consulted.
A three-judge Bench headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud decided to intervene, indicating that the court’s past experience of leaving matters open-ended, expecting the Chief Minister and the L-G to “meet and break bread” did not work. The Bench was referring to an earlier case on the appointment of the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission chairperson, which the court had to finally step in due to a prolonged impasse between the L-G and the Chief Minister.
Intervening, the apex court on Friday suggested the Centre provide a panel of names by Tuesday and directed both the chief minister and the LG to sit down and amicably discuss the shortlist of candidates.
“Why don’t LG (Delhi Lieutenant Governor VK Saxena) and CM (Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal) meet?” CJI Chandrachud said and then observed, “… (but) last time we said that, for the appointment of DERC (Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission) Chairperson, they never agreed…”
“So… why doesn’t LG and centre propose a panel of names? Ultimate choice will be from a panel made by you. You suggest a panel. Then they (the Delhi government) will pick up one name,” the Chief Justice proposed. He said the Delhi government could be given a “little free play in the joints” while picking the name. “Ultimately, the name will be from your panel,” Chandrachud told Solicitor General Tushar Mehta who appeared for the Centre. To this Mehta said he would take instructions from the Centre and return on November 28.
During the hearing senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi arguing for the Delhi government, said, “… it always the Delhi government that appointed. Now there is a generic ordinance… what I am objecting is the unilateral decision of the LG.” To this Mehta said it was, in fact, the Union Home Ministry that made these appointments “even prior to the impugned amendment”, referring to the Delhi Services Bill. However, Mr Singhvi argued this point, saying the ministry would only make appointments based on the advice of the Council of Ministers.
To highlight how some bureaucrats were being ill-treated by the Delhi government, Mehta also made a reference to the corruption allegations surrounding Mr Kumar, whose son was linked to an alleged real estate scam in a news report published on November 9. On Wednesday the Delhi High Court gave Mr Kumar relief, directing the news website to take down the article that was said to be defamatory of the current Delhi Chief Secretary.
Mr Kumar, in his plea, sought to take down the article as well as a direction to restrain the news portal and the reporter from publishing any further defamatory articles against him. His counsel had said the article was “pre-planned” in order to “activate” people against him and to “please some people.”
