Kejriwal Govt Moves SC Again After Spat With LG On Control Over 'Services'; Hearing Next Week

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

10 July 2018 6:11 AM GMT

  • Kejriwal Govt Moves SC Again After Spat With LG On Control Over Services; Hearing Next Week

    Delhi's AAP government today moved Supreme Court seeking an early hearing on pending issues relating to turf war with Lt Governor Anil Baijal including Services.The plea was mentioned by Delhi Government Standing counsel Rahul Mehra before a bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud.In the pending litigation, which a constitution bench said, will...

    Delhi's AAP government today moved Supreme Court seeking an early hearing on pending issues relating to turf war with Lt Governor Anil Baijal including Services.

    The plea was mentioned by Delhi Government Standing counsel Rahul Mehra before a bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud.

    In the pending litigation, which a constitution bench said, will be decided by a two-judge bench, Delhi Government wants the SC to conclusively adjudicate as to who holds control over the bureaucrats, their appointments and transfer.

    Mehra urged an early hearing saying there was a stalemate affecting day to day governance.

    However, the CJI refused it saying "it will be heard sometime next week".

    The petition comes close on the heels of both the government and L-G sparred over who holds the power to transfer and post officers in the national capital.

    While Kejriwal sent a letter to Baijal urging to “fully implement the apex court order giving primacy to the Delhi government”, the L-G responded that appeals were pending before a regular bench in the top court and “not to draw wrong inferences".

    On Monday, Kejriwal accused Anil Baijal of selectively accepting of the Supreme Court’s last week ruling. He said that the court’s order makes it clear that the executive powers of Centre are limited to three subjects only (land, police and public order)”

    Next Story