AAP Rajya Sabha MP Raghav Chadha on Sunday said that he wrote a letter to the chairman of Rajya Sabha opposing the introduction of the Bill replacing the Delhi Ordinance.
He said that the introduction of the Bill in Rajya Sabha to replace the Delhi Ordinance is impermissible for three important reasons which he highlighted in the letter.
“On May 11, 2023, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court unanimously held that as a matter of constitutional requirement, the civil servants serving in the Government of NCT of Delhi are answerable to the elected arm of the government, i.e. the elected Council of Ministers presided over by the Chief Minister. This link of accountability was held to be crucial to a democratic and popularly accountable model of government.
“In one single stroke, the Ordinance has undone this model by seizing this control again from the duly elected Government of Delhi and vesting it in the hands of the unelected LG. The Ordinance’s design is evident, i.e. to strip the Government of NCT of Delhi down to only its elected arm enjoying the mandate of the people of Delhi, but bereft of the governing apparatus necessary for meeting that mandate.
“This has left the GNCTD in a crisis of administration, put day-to-day governance in jeopardy, and has led the civil service to stall, disobey, and contradict the elected Government’s orders. Particularly, the Ordinance is blatantly unconstitutional for 3 reasons,” read his letter.
Chadha has said in the letter that the Ordinance and any Bill along the same lines as the Ordinance, seeks essentially to undo the position laid down by Court without amending the Constitution itself from which this position flows.
“The Ordinance does not change the basis of the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s decision, which is the Constitution itself. Secondly, Article 239AA(7)(a) empowers Parliament to make a law to “give effect to” or to “supplement” the provisions contained in Article 239AA. Under the scheme of Article 239AA, control over ‘Services’ lies with the Delhi Government. A Bill in line with the Ordinance is, therefore, not a Bill to “give effect to” or “supplement” Article 239AA but a Bill to damage and destroy Article 239AA, which is impermissible,” read his letter.
Chadha said the Ordinance was also under challenge in the Supreme Court.
He said that thus this Bill was unconstitutional and this House should not consider it. “I would therefore request you to not permit the introduction of this Bill and direct the Government to withdraw it and save the Constitution. I hope the Hon’ble Chairman will not permit the introduction of the Bill and direct the government to withdraw it,” his letter read.
Comments
0 comment