Delhi Govt vs LG - Centre's Plea For Larger Bench Reference An Attempt To Review Constitution Bench Judgment : Singhvi Tells Supreme Court

The Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi(GNCTD) on Thursday submitted before the Supreme Court that the Central Government's request for reference of the dispute relating to the control over civil servants to a Constitution Bench is actually an attempt for a reconsideration or review of the 2018 Constitution Bench judgment.Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for the Delhi Government, made the submissions before a 3-judge bench comprising CJI NV Ramana, Justice Surya Kant and Justice Hima Kohli which is currently hearing the matter.It may be recalled that in February 2019, a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court had delivered a split verdict on the question of powers of the GNCTD and Union Government over services and referred the matter to a larger bench. Last month, a 3-judge bench led by CJI Ramana had decided to take up the case.In July 2018, a 5-judge bench of the Supreme Court had laid down broad parameters for governance of the national capital, amid the differences between the elected government and the Lieutenant Governor. Today, Mr Singhvi submitted that asking for a reference to the constitution bench, on issues which have been dealt with by a constitution bench may not amount to a referral; it actually amounts to saying that they want the Constitution bench reconsidered by another constitution bench.Once Constitution Bench Decides, No Need To Ask For Multiple Referrals:Singhvi submitted that the Union of India's argument is that a Constitution bench is required to interpret the phrase 'in so far as' in Article 239AA of the Constitution.He submitted that the Constitution bench dealt with the Article in 2 paragraphs directly and held that unless there's an explicit exclusion, there can't be implied exclusion. Further, apart those two paras there 6-8 other references by the bench in this regard."Once constitution bench decides matter, there's no system, no need of asking again and again to refer," he said.According to Mr Singhvi, the issue was dealt with by the constitution bench, and it will be a never ending procedure if court refers a matter every time the slightest thing is taken out."How does this matter if there's 3 or 5 judges' isn't the question. It's not question of why not, it's about why," Mr Singhvi said.The Bench said, "If there are two material provisions in a constitution sub article, and have been interpreted by Constitution Bench then you are right that there's no need to time and again consider."However, the Bench said that the difficulty arises when the there's no discussion and conclusion on a point referred, and in that situation it might be a necessity to refer it to larger bench in terms of Article 145(3).Mr Singhvi responded saying that even then there's no obligation to refer the case. That the Constitution Bench may have dealt with it imperfectly, wrongly, or may have dealt with it 90% with 10% left out is no ground for 3 judge bench to make a reference.According to Mr Singhvi, there is no rule that when a constitution bench is cited and one or two issues are found to be not decided or partially decided, the court is obliged to refer it."In this case issue being considered is decided by the constitution bench. Your lordships aren't obliged to refer, had the Constitution bench said something against, then it'd be different. If it is said that in case where one issue is decided and one not decided it has to be referred under Article 145, there will be many cases," he said.The bench asked Mr Singhvi what prejudice will be caused to the Delhi Government if the matter is referred to a constitution bench."Its not about why not, it's about why! There's to be a demonstration of why," Mr Singhvi said.How Many Bites of Apply Will Court Be Giving Them (Centre)? : SinghviWhile pointing out that the Centre's requests for referral have been heard multiple times by the court, Mr Singhvi submitted, "Your lordships are not hearing this for first time, multiple attempts have been made. How many bites of apple will lordships be giving them?""How many times? On a discretionary basis why should a bench refer it? Justice has been done one way or the other by reference," he said.No Constitution Bench Can Refer To The Phrase More Than The 2018 Bench Has:Mr Singhvi submitted that no Constitution Bench can refer to the phrase "in so far as any such matter is applicable to UT" more than the 2018 Constitution bench already has.He submitted that the Constitution bench has comprehensively interpreted 239 AA 3a which contains the phrase. Further the Union of India' argument that the phrase places implicit limitation on power of Delhi Assembly in addition to limitation in relation to explicitly excluded entries was also raised by them before the bench."Your lordships aren't here to second guess, this is objecting to constitution bench, as it is said, the Supreme Court is right because its final, it's not final because it's right. The Constitution bench may have flaws, but...

Delhi Govt vs LG - Centre's Plea For Larger Bench Reference An Attempt To Review Constitution Bench Judgment : Singhvi Tells Supreme Court

Srishti Ojha

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Srishti Ojha

Delhi Govt vs LG - Centre's Plea For Larger Bench Reference An Attempt To Review Constitution Bench Judgment : Singhvi Tells Supreme Court

Srishti Ojha

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Srishti Ojha

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers