[As the National Capital Territory of Delhi is not a full-fledged
State, Article 239AA (3) explicitly grants its legislative assembly
the power to make laws with respect to all but three entries in the
State list. These entries relate to public order, police and land. It
is because of this exception that the Delhi Police is under the
control of the Union government and not the Delhi government.
Thus, following on from Article 239AA (4) (quoted above), the
lieutenant governor is to act in his discretion as far as matters
relating to public order, police and land are concerned. In all other
matters, he is to act on the aid and advice of the council of
ministers. The question for consideration, therefore, is simply this:
Is the appointment of the chief secretary related to public order,
police and land? The answer is no.
(Excerpted from, and highlighted in, sl. no. I below.)]

I/II.
http://scroll.in/article/728794/in-the-kejriwal-jung-battle-is-the-indian-constitution-on-the-chief-ministers-side

OPINION

In the Kejriwal-Jung battle, is the Indian Constitution on the chief
minister's side?
Abhishek Sudhir · Today · 09:00 am

In the Kejriwal-Jung battle, is the Indian Constitution on the chief
minister's side?
Photo Credit: Raveendran/AFP

This is no ordinary face-off. It is a full-blown constitutional crisis.

Headline writers are having a field day as Delhi Lieutenant Governor
Najeeb Jung and Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal battle it out over the
appointment of Shakuntala Gamlin as acting Chief Secretary.

Jung made the appointment while Delhi Chief Secretary KK Sharma was
away in the United States on a personal visit. His decision
immediately invited Kejriwal's ire. "I would strongly request and urge
you to remain within the confines of the Constitution and the laws
relating to government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi,"
thundered Kejriwal in a strongly-worded letter sent to Jung.

A look at the provisions Kejriwal is referring to helps demonstrate
why this is no ordinary jung, but a full-blown constitutional crisis
in the offing.

Special provisions for Delhi

On February 1, 1992, the Union Territory of Delhi was renamed the
National Capital Territory of Delhi. Under Article 239 of the
Constitution, every union territory is to be administered by the
president acting through an administrator appointed by him. In the
case of Delhi, by virtue of Article 239AA of the Constitution, the
administrator appointed under Article 239, currently Najeeb Jung, is
designated as the lieutenant governor.

But unlike in other union territories, the powers of Delhi's
lieutenant governor are circumscribed by the presence of a legislative
assembly whose members are chosen by direct election in the
territorial constituencies in the National Capital Territory of Delhi.
Kejriwal and his Aam Aadmi Party had won this election earlier this
year, capturing 67 of the 70 seats in the Assembly.

To act as a conduit between the Legislative Assembly and the L-G,
Article 239AA (4) of the Constitution provides that:
There shall be a Council of Ministers consisting of not more than ten
per cent of the total number of members in the Legislative Assembly,
with the Chief Minister at the head to aid and advise the Lieutenant
Governor in the exercise of his functions in relation to matters with
respect to which the Legislative Assembly has power to make laws,
except in so far as he is, by or under any law, required to act in his
discretion.

What this means is that the lieutenant governor, in the exercise of
his functions relating to matters that fall within the purview of the
legislative assembly, is to be guided by the council of ministers
(headed currently by Kejriwal in his capacity as chief minister).
However, the lieutenant governor is not bound by the council of
ministers' advice where he has the power to act in his discretion.

Therefore, in assessing the constitutionality of Gamlin's appointment
as acting chief secretary, what needs to be determined is whether the
lieutenant governor was acting in his discretionary capacity. In order
to effectively answer this question, it is first necessary to examine
the laws relating to the National Capital Territory of Delhi in
conjunction with Article 239AA.

Laws relating to NCT

The powers of a legislative assembly are found in the Seventh Schedule
of the Constitution. The Union list of the Seventh Schedule lists
matters falling within the exclusive legislative competence of the
Union. The State list lists those matters that fall within the
exclusive legislative competence of the States. And the concurrent
list lists matters to which the executive power of the both the Union
and the States extends.

***As the National Capital Territory of Delhi is not a full-fledged
State, Article 239AA (3) explicitly grants its legislative assembly
the power to make laws with respect to all but three entries in the
State list. These entries relate to public order, police and land. It
is because of this exception that the Delhi Police is under the
control of the Union government and not the Delhi government.***
[Emphasis added.]

***Thus, following on from Article 239AA (4) (quoted above), the
lieutenant governor is to act in his discretion as far as matters
relating to public order, police and land are concerned. In all other
matters, he is to act on the aid and advice of the council of
ministers. The question for consideration, therefore, is simply this:
Is the appointment of the chief secretary related to public order,
police and land? The answer is no.*** [Emphasis added.]

Rules of transaction

With Delhi Chief Secretary KK Sharma away in the US on a personal
visit, the lieutenant governor issued instructions directly to the
Principal Secretary (Services) Anindo Majumdar to give Gamlin the
additional charge of chief secretary of Delhi.

Kejriwal alleges that the actions of Jung are unconstitutional and
violates both the Transaction of Business Rules and the Government of
the National Capital Territory of Delhi Act, 1991.

The Transaction of Business Rules, as the name suggests, were drafted
with the intent of regulating the procedural nuances that govern the
relationship between the lieutenant governor and the council of
ministers. Under Rule 4(2), the minister in charge of a department
shall be primarily responsible for the disposal of the business
pertaining to that department.

As far as the appointment of the chief secretary is concerned, the
minister in charge is Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, who holds
the services portfolio. Under Rule 14 of the Transaction of Business
Rules, the proposal for the appointment of the acting chief secretary
should have been approved by the council of ministers and then sent to
the lieutenant governor by the secretary to the council, who in this
case is Majumdar. Instead, the converse happened. This was a clear
contravention of the TBR by the lieutenant governor's office.

Delhi's identity crisis

It would be unthinkable for the governor of Uttar Pradesh to notify
the appointment of a chief secretary by completely bypassing a
democratically elected chief minister and his cabinet. And yet, this
is precisely what has happened in the case of Delhi.

Jung could argue that the appointment of an acting chief secretary is
a matter that is not dealt with by the Transaction of Business Rules,
and according to Rule 47 the lieutenant governor must take
instructions from the central government in such matters. Jung could
also find support from Section 41 of the Government of the National
Capital Territory of Delhi Act to argue that the appointment of an
acting chief secretary is a matter that falls outside the purview of
the powers of the legislative assembly, thereby giving him the
discretionary power to make the appointment by acting on the
instructions of the central government.

Putting aside legal technicalities, the question that remains is: how
can a chief minister be expected to run a state without a chief
secretary of his or her choice? But therein lies the nub - Delhi is
not a state. This at least seems to be the official line of the
Bharatiya Janata Party, which just a few months ago had invested all
its energies into winning the Delhi Assembly elections.

One of BJP's most prominent leaders, Arun Jaitley, recently chided the
Delhi voter for causing the current crisis by "experimenting" with
AAP. A party spokesperson, demeaning the constitutional status of the
capital, referred to it as a municipality and Kejriwal as a glorified
municipal leader.

It's unfortunate that matter have come to such a pass. Delhi deserves
better. Delhi's democratically elected chief minister deserves better.

II.
http://www.firstpost.com/politics/lg-no-independent-discretion-former-asg-indira-jaising-backs-kejriwal-govt-gamlin-appointment-2251952.html

'LG has no independent discretion': Former ASG Indira Jaising backs
Kejriwal govt over Gamlin appointment
May 19, 2015 13:52 IST

New Delhi: Delhi government has sought opinion over the issue of
powers of the Lt-Governor to appoint a chief secretary from eminent
lawyers Rajeev Dhavan and Indira Jaising, who have supported its stand
asserting that the LG has no independent discretion in the matter.

Supreme Court lawyers Rajeev Dhavan, in his letter, said that Chief
Minister has a "perfect right" to a Chief Secretary of his choice and
the current "crisis" has been created by the Lt Governor.

Former Attorney Solicitor General of India Indira Jaising. Image
courtesy: YouTube screengrabFormer Additional Solicitor General of
India Indira Jaising. Image courtesy: YouTube screengrab

"The Chief Minister has a perfect right to a Chief Secretary of his
choice. I am firmly of the opinion that this crisis has been created
entirely by the LG," Dhavan wrote in his opinion to Delhi government
over appointment of Shakuntala Gamlin as acting Chief Secretary by Lt
Governor Najeeb Jung against the wishes of the Arvind Kejriwal
dispensation.

Dhavan mentioned that "lapse of 40 hours is not sufficient reason for
the LG to impose his choice on the CM especially when his urgency
powers arise only when a reference is pending before the central
government".

He mentioned that at best, the Lt Governor can advice the Chief
Minister that it is necessary to appoint a Chief Secretary forthwith.

***It is absolutely clear that the LG has exceeded his authority and
has turned the entire relationship between himself and council of
ministers on its head to jeopardise democracy and the Constitution, he
said.*** [Emphasis added.]

Former Additional Solicitor General Indira Jaising also supported the
Delhi Government observing, ***"There is no provision granting the LG
the power to act at his own discretion in the matter of appointment of
the Chief Secretary."*** [Emphasis added.]

Explaining the appointment procedure, Jaisingh said, "The proposal to
appoint the Chief Secretary must be initiated by the government in
accordance with the rules of business.

"The question of any difference of opinion on that issue can arise
only after the proposal is made by the council of Ministers and sent
to the LG. Prior to that no question of difference of opinion can
arise."

Stating that the LG has no independent discretion in the matter of
appointment of Chief Secretary in the democratic scheme of the
Constitution, she mentioned, "The decision who to appoints the Chief
Secretary must be of the Council of Ministers and it is only when the
LG has a difference of opinion on that decision that his role begins,
hence there is no question of the LG taking the decision who to
appoint as chief secretary without waiting for the decision of the
Council of Ministers."

Amid the bitter face-off, the AAP government last night directed all
its officials to apprise the Chief Minister or Minister concerned
about any oral or written direction from the LG or his office before
following them.

In a directive, the order signed by Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal
said the bureaucrats including the Chief Secretary will have to first
consult with the Chief Minister and other Ministers about any
communication from the LG before acting on such directions.

PTI
-- 
Peace Is Doable

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send an email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to