Petitioners won't face action over old notes

Petitioners won't face action over old notes

Petitioners won't face action over old notes

In a major blow to Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, the Supreme Court today ruled that his government needs the Lieutenant Governor's nod to govern the national capital.

The 14 petitioners, including NRIs who were not in the country when demonetisation was announced, however, said that they neither challenged the constitutional validity of the demonetisation nor the provisions of the RBI Act.

What emerged during the daylong hearing was that Delhi government can't look at in the area of law and order, police and land, and the in the area where it can enact law and aid and advise the Lt. Governor, the latter can exercise his veto and citing differences, refer the matter to the President for decision.

Pushing for more power for the state government in areas of public order and land, he said, "I am not questioning parliamentary supremacy but an elected government can not be sans power". The L-G, he added, was holding meeting separately with the officials without ministers.

The law, signed by former President Pranab Mukherjee on 27 February, also provides for a minimum fine Rs 50,000 for a false declaration by people who were overseas during the demonetisation period (November 9 - December 30, 2016) and given time to deposit such scrapped notes with the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) till March 31. Prima facie it appears that it gives more power to Lieutenant Governor, unlike other Union Territories.

Sensing where the bench was driving at, Subramanium said that the Delhi government too was raising its resources.

The observation was made by a constitution bench comprising five judges as the Delhi government began its arguments on the long-standing tussle between the Centre and the state government over the exercise of administrative power in Delhi.

Delhi was given an assembly and an elected government through Article 239 (AA) incorporated in the Constitution by the 69th amendment in 1991.

As for the contention that the L-G was exceeding his powers, the court told the AAP government to spell out the specifics to enable the court to assess its points.

Related news