Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(SC) 9844
Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJ
Government of NCT of Delhi – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Civil Appeal No 2357 of 2017
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Dr. A M Singhvi, Shadan Farasat
For the Respondents: Tushar Mehta
The Supreme Court affirmed that the National Capital Territory possesses legislative and executive powers over services, excluding those related to public order, police, and land, thus recognizing its unique constitutional status distinct from other Union Territories.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 239AA - Legislative and executive powers in National Capital Territory - The Supreme Court clarified the asymmetrical federal structure regarding governance between the Union Territory and the Union Government, addressing issues surrounding control over 'services' in NCTD, with a focus on the applicability of the term 'State' for legislative competence. The court noted that the legislative power of NCTD extends to all subjects in List II, excluding certain specified areas, thereby asserting the unique governing status of NCTD. (Paras 1, 5, 164, 165)
(B) Federalism - Concept of asymmetric federalism - The court emphasizes that NCTD represents a distinct governance structure under the Constitution, entrenching authority distinct from other Union Territories while ensuring accountability through legislative powers. (Para 162)
(C) Legislative Assembly - NCTD has the right to legislate on 'services' in Entry 41 of List II and has the executive power to control 'services' except for matters concerning public order, police, and land. (Paras 160, 164)
(D) Constitutional interpretation - The interpretations derive from established precedents reflecting a commitment to uphold representative democracy and local governance while balancing national interests. (Paras 18-19, 64)
JUDGEMENT
Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI A.
The Reference .............................................................................................. 4 B.
Submissions ............................................................................................... 11 C.
Interpretation of
Conclusion ................................................................................................ 103 PART A A. The Reference
1. This case before us deals with the asymmetric federal model of governance in India, involving the contest of power between a Union Territory and the Union Government. The issue is who would have control over the “services” in the National Capital Territory of Delhi1: the Government of NCTD2 or the Lieutenant Governor acting on behalf of the Union Government. The question arose subsequent to a notification3 dated 21 May 2015 issued by the Union Ministry of Home Affairs, which stated as follows:
- “... in accordance with the provisions contained in article 239 and sub-clause (a) of clause (3) of 239AA, the President hereby directs that – subject to his control and further orders, the Lieutenant Governor of the National Capital Territory of Delhi, shall in respect of matters connected with ‘Public Order’, ‘Police’, ‘Land’ and ‘Services’ as stated hereinabove, exercise the powers and discharge the functions of the Central Government, to the extent delegated to him from time to time by the President.
- Provided that the Lieutenant Governor of the National Capital Territory of Delhi may, in his discretion, obtain the views of the Chief Minister of the National Capital Territory of Delhi in regard to the matter of ‘Services’ wherever he deems it appropriate.”
- The notification provided that the Lieutenant Governor of NCTD shall exercise control “to the extent delegated to him from time to time by the President” over 1 “NCT
