Raghav Chadha, an AAP representative in the Rajya Sabha, said on Sunday that he sent the Rajya Sabha chairman a letter objecting to the introduction of the Bill replacing the Delhi Ordinance.
For three crucial reasons that he outlined in the letter, he said that introducing the Bill in Rajya Sabha to replace the Delhi Ordinance is unlawful.
The civil servants working for the Government of the NCT of Delhi are legally required to answer to the elected arm of the government, the elected Council of Ministers presided over by the Chief Minister, the Supreme Court’s Constitution Bench ruled on May 11, 2023. A democratic and responsible to the people type of governance was believed to depend on this relationship between responsibility and accountability.
The Ordinance has completely destroyed this paradigm by taking authority away from the lawfully elected Government of Delhi and giving it to the unelected LG in a single motion. The purpose of the Ordinance is clear: to reduce the Government of the NCT of Delhi to only its elected branch, which has the support of the Delhi populace but lacks the administrative infrastructure required to carry out that support.
“This has placed the GNCTD in an administrative crisis, threatened day-to-day government, and caused the civil service to delay, ignore, and contradict the directives of the elected Government. His letter said that the Ordinance is flagrantly unlawful for three grounds in particular.
In the letter, Chadha said that the Ordinance and any similar Bill sought to fundamentally overturn the Court’s ruling without altering the Constitution itself, which is the source of this ruling.
“The Constitution itself served as the foundation for the Supreme Court’s ruling, which is not altered by the Ordinance. Furthermore, Article 239AA(7)(a) gives Parliament the authority to pass legislation to “give effect to” or “supplement” the requirements of Article 239AA. The Delhi Government is in charge of ‘Services’ under the provisions of Article 239AA. Therefore, a bill in accordance with the Ordinance is not a bill to “give effect to” or “supplement” Article 239AA; rather, it is an unlawful bill that would “damage and destroy” it.
According to Chadha, the Supreme Court is also hearing arguments about the Ordinance.
He said that because of this, the House should not even examine the Bill since it is unconstitutional. “I would therefore ask that you order the government to withdraw this Bill and prevent its introduction in order to preserve the Constitution. I really hope that the Honorable Chairman would order the administration to withdraw the Bill and forbid its introduction.
