Introducing Delhi Ordinance “Impermissible”, Says AAP MP, Lists 3 Reasons

New Delhi:

Aam Aadmi Party leader Raghav Chadha today wrote to Rajya Sabha Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar opposing even the introduction in the Parliament of the controversial Ordinance passed by the Centre which snatched control over bureaucracy from the Delhi government. Calling it “blatantly unconstitutional”, Mr Chadha listed three reasons why he believes the introduction of the Ordinance is “impermissible”.

मैंने उपराष्ट्रपति एवं Chairman को चिट्ठी लिखी है कि दिल्ली सरकार की शक्तियां छीनने वाला ‘अध्यादेश” नाजायज़ है इसलिए पेश नहीं किया जाना चाहिए

क्योंकि इसके 3 कारण हैं-

1.Supreme Court के निर्णय के आधार को बदलना होगा
2. ये अध्यादेश संविधान के अनुच्छेद 239AA की धज्जियां उड़ा देता… pic.twitter.com/sgL641dLzV

— AAP (@AamAadmiParty) July 23, 2023

The AAP leader referred to the May 11 judgement of a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, which he said 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. The Ordinance seeks essentially to undo the position laid down by the Supreme Court without amending the Constitution itself, from which this position flows, Mr Chadha argued in his letter.

“The Ordinance has lost its legal validity because no law can be made to nullify the court’s decision without changing the basis of that decision,” he said.

My letter to the Hon’ble Chairman of Rajya Sabha opposing the very introduction of the Bill replacing the Delhi Ordinance.

The introduction of the Bill in Rajya Sabha to replace the Delhi Ordinance is IMPERMISSIBLE for three important reasons, as highlighted in the letter.

I… pic.twitter.com/tW10WWPTgG

— Raghav Chadha (@raghav_chadha) July 23, 2023

As his second reason, Mr Chadha said Article 239AA(7)(a) of the Constitution empowers Parliament to make a law to “give effect to” or to “supplement” the provisions contained in Article 239AA, which states that Parliament has the power to make laws with respect to “any matter” for NCTD. 

“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,” the letter said.

Explaining his third reason, Raghav Chadha said the Ordinance is already under challenge in the Supreme Court, and it would be “proper to wait for the judgement.

“As the constitutionality of any Act that may be passed by the Parliament is already before a Constitution Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it will be proper to await the outcome of the decision before introducing the Bill,” he said.

“Thus, this Bill is unconstitutional and this House cannot 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,” the letter concluded.

Mr Chadha claimed the Ordinance was designed 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.

“It has left the Delhi government 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,” he said.