April 28, 2024 19:24 (IST)
Follow us:
facebook-white sharing button
twitter-white sharing button
instagram-white sharing button
youtube-white sharing button
'Not joining any other party': Arvinder Singh Lovely after resigning as Delhi Congress chief | Bus carrying 36 people erupts in flames in Mumbai-Pune Expressway, all passengers safe | Amid Congress' Amethi indecision, Robert Vadra says 'Entire country wants me to join politics' | Arrested Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal's wife Sunita Kejriwal gets major role in AAP | Two CRPF personnel killed in suspected attack by Kuki militants in Manipur
Delhi vs Centre power struggle: Supreme Court reserves order DelhivCentre

Delhi vs Centre power struggle: Supreme Court reserves order

India Blooms News Service | @indiablooms | 28 Apr 2022, 03:46 pm

New Delhi/UNI: The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its order on an appeal filed by the Centre to refer the power struggle issue between Delhi and Central Government to a larger Constitution Bench.

The union government on Wednesday filed the application seeking holistic interpretation of Article 239AA pertaining to legal dispute between the Delhi Government and the Centre regarding the control over administrative services in the national capital.

The bench comprising Chief Justice NV Ramana, and Justices Surya Kant and Hima Kohli after hearing the plea concerning the teething issues over bureaucratic and administrative control between the two governments, expressed its intention to wrap up the matter by May.

A writ petition filed by the Delhi Government last year challenging the GNCTD(Amendment) Act 2021 was also listed along with the main case.

The bench said in case a Constitution Bench is constituted, it would want the hearing to conclude by May 15.

Both sides agreed that the hearings could be completed before the court closes for summer vacations.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta filed the application a day back seeking referral to the larger bench and submitted on Wednesday that the judgment given by three of the five-judge bench had not interpreted the most significant part of Article 239AA which is the use of the phrase, "insofar as any such matter is applicable to Union Territories".

It was also submitted by Mehta that there are three important elements of Article 239AA.

The Solicitor General said there has been no clarity on the second and the third issue which may finally be adjudicated upon by the Constitution Bench.

Mehta also submitted that Article 239AA which was suggested by the Balakrishnan Committee was incorporated verbatim.

Support Our Journalism

We cannot do without you.. your contribution supports unbiased journalism

IBNS is not driven by any ism- not wokeism, not racism, not skewed secularism, not hyper right-wing or left liberal ideals, nor by any hardline religious beliefs or hyper nationalism. We want to serve you good old objective news, as they are. We do not judge or preach. We let people decide for themselves. We only try to present factual and well-sourced news.

Support objective journalism for a small contribution.