38.6c New Delhi, India, Wednesday, December 03, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

CJI NV Ramana led bench to hear a plea by Delhi government challenging the Government of NCT Delhi (Amendment) Act, 2021

By LawStreet News Network      27 April, 2022 03:30 PM      0 Comments
CJI NVRamana Delhi government Government of NCT

CJI NV Ramana led bench to hear a plea by Delhi government challenging the Government of NCT Delhi (Amendment) Act, 2021 over the issue of administrative services

SG Tushar Mehta: By way of a preface, this court is aware that article 239 AA was inserted after the constitution was framed. Initially there was concept of state were in class A, B etc. Delhi was class C state. Legislature wanted to do something

SG: World looks at Delhi as it looks at India. All ambassadors etc are also located here. Before inserting 239 AA there was a study undertaken related to different states and capital. there was bal krishnan commission DelhiGovtvsLG

SG: Parliament had discussed the report and debates of parliament has the same sanctity as the constituent debates. Bal Krishnan report will show what the parliamentarians wanted when 239 AA was introduced.

SG: Constitution bench had decided the case of 239AA and then on some questions two judge bench heard and then it was referred to a 3 judge bench.

SG: mandate the commission was given showed that this was not a matter of one political party vs the other. It showed how capital was admistered and the national and international obligations.

CJI: We are not disputing all of this. But now you are going back .. so then refer to the power of assembly

SG: When a constitutional provision is interpreted then we have to refer to constituent assembly debates/ this was a huge domain exercise

CJI: After the 5 judge bench judgment there is no need to back to what was there etc. you are arguing an application to refer it to 5 judge bench

SG: Even the constitution bench was not assisted with this.

SG: Whatever this commission suggested 239AA is verbatim taken by the parliament. this has its own sanctity.

SG: UT cannot have any public debt or property vested in it, says the commission. under the constitution there are only two services, one is services of union and one services of state. no services of UT

SG: It is one thing to administer and manage Lakshwadeep or Puducherry and it is another thing to manage Delhi which is the capital of the country.

CJI: It is not necessary to get into Bal Krishna committee application. you say it has to be heard by 5 judges bench .. please come to that point

SG: Please allow me to read one page of the report for my satisfaction

SG: The report says that It is not constitutionally possible to get services under Union Territory and there cannot be a public service commission also under UT

SG: When matter comes before your lordship, please see the order of reference by Justices Sikri and Aggarwal.

SG: In NDMC judgment 9 judge bench of this court finally concludes that Delhi is UT with legislative power and 239AA part A deals with UT. Entry 1, 2 is about specific exclusion.

SG Mehta reads the reference order.

SG: This needs to be referred to a constitution bench and thus our limitation will not be there.

Sr Adv AM Singhvi: reference not to be done has been decided. centre has taken two or three hearings to show why this matter should not be heard.

Singhvi: Balakrishnan report was a historical fact happened in 1999. judgment starts by saying this. then he reads a para by Justice Bhushan led bench and he is a dissenter in the judgment, why are we arguing about balakrishnan report?

Justice Surya Kant: the report was discussed by 5 judges bench and they said they dont have to rely on the balakrishnan report. that is why we are not looking into that and also not looking into the parliamentary debates.

CJI: How much time will you take?

Singhvi: 30 minutes

CJI: then tomorrow

Matter adjourned.



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

allahabad-hc-condemns-police-for-taking-woman-into-possession-despite-stay-orders-immediate-release
Trending Judiciary
Allahabad HC Condemns Police for Taking Woman Into ‘Possession’ Despite Stay; Orders Immediate Release [Read Order]

Allahabad High Court slammed Muzaffarnagar Police for violating a stay order, declaring the detenue a major and ordering her immediate release.

02 December, 2025 09:27 PM
rera-orders-cannot-be-executed-through-civil-court-execution-petitions-karnataka-hc
Trending Judiciary
RERA Orders Cannot Be Executed Through Civil Court Execution Petitions: Karnataka HC [Read Order]

Karnataka High Court rules RERA orders cannot be executed through civil courts, holding that such orders are not decrees under the CPC.

02 December, 2025 10:19 PM

TOP STORIES

forklifts-and-cranes-used-inside-factory-are-motor-vehicles-registration-and-tax-mandatory-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Forklifts And Cranes Used Inside Factory Are ‘Motor Vehicles’; Registration & Tax Mandatory: Kerala HC [Read Judgment]

Kerala High Court rules that forklifts and cranes used inside factories are ‘motor vehicles’, requiring mandatory registration and tax under motor vehicle laws.

27 November, 2025 10:29 AM
loading-of-mineral-constitutes-transportation-us-21-4-of-the-mmdra-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Loading of Mineral Constitutes ‘Transportation’ U/S 21(4) Of The MMDRA: Kerala HC [Read Judgment]

Kerala HC rules that loading minerals into a vehicle amounts to transportation under Section 21(4) of the MMDRA, upholding seizure for illegal mineral movement.

27 November, 2025 10:43 AM
sc-upholds-himachal-pradeshs-cancellation-of-tender-loi-sets-aside-high-court-order
Trending Judiciary
SC Upholds Himachal Pradesh’s Cancellation of Tender LoI, Sets Aside High Court Order [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court upholds Himachal Pradesh’s cancellation of a PDS tender LoI, ruling it created no enforceable rights and overturning the High Court order.

27 November, 2025 10:57 AM
chhattisgarh-hc-quashes-pg-medical-admission-rules-for-violating-article-14-rejects-institutional-domicile-preference-upholds-merit
Trending Judiciary
Chhattisgarh HC Quashes PG Medical Admission Rules for Violating Article 14, Rejects Institutional/Domicile Preference, Upholds Merit [Read Order]

Chhattisgarh High Court quashes PG medical admission rules, holding institutional and domicile-based preferences unconstitutional and affirming merit.

27 November, 2025 11:16 AM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email