38.6c New Delhi, India, Sunday, August 31, 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

words-spreads-faster-than-winds-sc-relies-on-testimony-of-neighbour-acquits-woman-in-dowry-harassment-case
Trending Judiciary
'Words spreads faster than winds,' SC relies on testimony of neighbour; acquits woman in dowry harassment case [Read Judgment]

SC acquits woman in dowry case, citing neighbour’s testimony: “Word spreads faster than wind” — conviction under Section 498A set aside.

30 August, 2025 05:54 PM
sc-refuses-to-entertain-plea-against-use-of-temples-land-funds-for-building-college-in-chennai
Trending Judiciary
SC refuses to entertain plea against use of temples' land, funds for building college in Chennai

SC refuses plea against use of Chennai temples’ land, ₹25 cr funds for building college, says using temple assets for education not improper.

30 August, 2025 06:01 PM

TOP STORIES

sc-restores-mandatory-20-percent-deposit-for-suspension-of-sentence-in-cheque-bounce-case
Trending Judiciary
SC Restores Mandatory 20% Deposit for Suspension of Sentence in Cheque Bounce Case [Read Order]

SC sets aside P&H HC order; rules 20% deposit mandatory for suspension of sentence in ₹8.65 crore cheque bounce case under NI Act.

25 August, 2025 12:35 PM
18-former-judges-write-to-union-home-minister-amit-shah-criticizing-his-remarks-on-justice-b-sudershan-reddy
Trending Judiciary
18 Former Judges write to Union Home Minister Amit Shah, criticizing his remarks on Justice B Sudershan Reddy

18 ex-judges write to Union HM Amit Shah, criticizing his remarks on Justice B Sudershan Reddy, stressing judicial independence and dignity.

25 August, 2025 03:09 PM
sc-stays-investigation-into-firs-against-csds-co-director-sanjay-kumar
Trending Judiciary
SC stays investigation into FIRs against CSDS co director Sanjay Kumar

SC stays probe into FIRs against CSDS co-director Sanjay Kumar over Maharashtra polling data post; says multiple cases show harassment motive.

25 August, 2025 03:14 PM
influencers-indulging-in-commercial-speech-cant-claim-fundamental-right-sc
Trending CelebStreet
Influencers indulging in commercial speech can't claim fundamental right: SC

SC: Influencers making commercial speech can’t claim fundamental rights; must apologize and act responsibly towards community sensitivities.

25 August, 2025 04:18 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email