Case Summary: Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (2023) | Legislative and Executive Power of National Capital Territory of Delhi (NCTD)

The Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (2023) is a landmark Supreme Court judgment that clarified the division of powers between the Delhi Government and the Union Government.

Case Title: Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India
Citation: Civil Appeal No. 2357 of 2017
Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, C.J., M.R. Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and P.S. Narasimha, J.J
Date of Judgment: 11.05.2023

Introduction

The Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (2023) addresses the scope of the Legislature and Executive power of the Government of NCT of Delhi. The central issue, in this case, was the extent of control the elected Delhi government had over ‘Services’ (i.e. appointment and transfer of officers) and the role of the Lieutenant Governor, who represents the Central government.

This case revolved around the interpretation and scope of Article 239AA of the Indian Constitution, which provides the provisions of governance to the Government of NCT of Delhi.

The question arose mainly of who would exercise the Legislative and Executive powers over Services in the NCT of Delhi.

Background

This case started with the notification dated 21.05.2015 issued by the Minister of Home Affairs, which provided that the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi shall in respect of the matter connected with Public Order, Police, land, and Services, exercise his control over the extent to which was delegated to him by the President of India.

The 2015 Notification added Entry 41 under the exception of Article 239AA(3)(a). It gave power to the lieutenant governor to make laws, which denied the power of the government of NCTD in the same way. The High Court of Delhi upheld the Notification that the legislative and executive power of NCTD over Entry 41 was not extended to services related to "public order", "police" and "land"

The notification also provided that the lieutenant governor can seek the Chief minister's view at his discretion. In short, the Lieutenant Governor can exercise the legislative and executive power of public order, police, land, and services.

Issues

• Scope of Article 239AA: Whether the Delhi legislative assembly has the power to make laws over “services” when it is not explicitly mentioned in Article 239AA (3).
  
• Role of Lieutenant Governor: Whether the Government of NCTD or Lieutenant Governor has Legislative and executive control over Entry 41 of list II of the seventh Schedule.
  

Appellant's Argument

Delhi Government argued that they have constitutional authority over the “Services” (i.e. appointment and transfer of officers) under Article 239AA. They claimed that having control over the bureaucracy is essential for administration and policy-making for the government.

Delhi government pointed out that Article 239AA provides special status to Delhi. According to them, this clause allows the legislative assembly of Delhi to make laws on both State and Concurrent Lists except expressly excluded (Public Order, police, and Land) since “services” are not excluded from the list, they should have authority over it.

They also contended that Article 239AA (4) provides that the Lieutenant Governor should take ‘aid and advice’ of the Council of Ministers on matters related to the executive powers of the government. They emphasized that the Lieutenant Governor could not independently take any action.

They also claimed that excessive Lieutenant Governor control would restrain the ability of the elected government of Delhi to implement its policies and run the government. They urge the court to declare it unconstitutional as it would undermine the basic features of federalism, separation of power, and the rule of law.

Respondent's Argument

Respondent argued that Delhi is not a full-fledged state but a Union Territory, therefore the central government through the Lieutenant governor has control over the administration for security purposes.

The Union government also argued that "Services" are vital to Delhi's governance, particularly given that Delhi is the seat of the national government. They argued that services affect the functioning of key subjects under the Union’s control, such as Public Order, Police, and Land, thus, control over "Services" should remain with the Union.

They claimed that it is important to have the Lieutenant Governor’s role in Delhi’s administration to ensure national interest, especially in a territory as sensitive as Delhi.

Judgment

The Supreme Court of India delivered a landmark judgment which resolved the long-standing tussle between the elected government of Delhi and the Lieutenant Governor representing the Central government over the control of “Services”, specifically the power to appoint and transfer the bureaucrats in the National Capital of Delhi.

The bench concluded that the Government of the national capital of Delhi has legislative and executive power over administrative services except for the matter of police, public order, and land.

The court clearly stated that the “Services” came within the orbit of the Delhi Government as per Article 239AA of the Indian constitution except (for police, land, and public order) which are under the control of the Union Government.

The Court also provided that the lieutenant governor is bound by “aid and advise” of the council of ministers of the Delhi government. It cannot act independently. This was the victory of the Delhi government as the court rejected the claim of union government control over the services.

This judgment provided the detailed interpretation of Article 239AA of the Constitution, which provided special status to Delhi with a unique governance structure as a union territory with an elected legislative assembly and council of ministers.

Click Here to Read the Full Judgment

Conclusion

This judgment of the Supreme Court strengthens the Delhi government’s take on administrative services and limits the discretionary power of the Lieutenant Governor.

This ruling reinforced the Delhi Government's ability to function independently, while also clarifying the Union Government's role. The court also highlighted it is important not to interfere in the day-to-day business of the elected government and should work within their ambit.

Important Links