The Supreme Court has intervened in the ongoing dispute between Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal and Lieutenant Governor VK Saxena over the appointment of the Chairperson of the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC). In its recent observation, the apex court called on both parties to set aside their differences and engage in constructive dialogue to resolve the issue amicably. The controversy arose when Justice (retd) Umesh Kumar, a former judge of the Allahabad High Court, was appointed as the DERC chairman, but the Delhi government deemed the appointment “unconstitutional.”
Challenging the appointment in court, the Delhi government refused to send its minister to complete the oath of the DERC chairman. The power minister, Atishi, accused the Centre of making the appointment to disrupt the supply of free electricity to the people of Delhi and potentially harm the electricity sector. During the hearing, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing the Delhi government, informed the court that the Centre is yet to submit its response. The case is set to be heard again next Thursday.
The latest development takes place against the backdrop of the Centre’s ordinance, which has raised objections from the Delhi government. The ordinance seeks to transfer control of services from the government of Union Territory, sparking concerns over the distribution of power and authority. The Supreme Court granted two weeks to the Centre and the Lieutenant Governor to present a comprehensive response defending the validity of the ordinance.
The ordinance’s primary objective is to establish a National Capital Civil Service Authority, responsible for handling the relocation and disciplinary actions concerning Group-A officers from the DANICS cadre. Previously, the Lieutenant Governor had exclusive executive authority over transfers and appointments of all officers in the Delhi government.
In response to the ongoing dispute, Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has been working to garner political support, with the Congress party agreeing to vote against the ordinance in the Rajya Sabha. This move aligns with the larger Opposition unity, following the Patna Opposition meeting, though the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) had expressed dissatisfaction with Congress’ initial stance on the ordinance.
As the legal battle continues, the Supreme Court’s call for dialogue between the parties reflects its commitment to seeking an amicable resolution to the appointment dispute. The future proceedings will shape the dynamics of power in the capital city, as both the Delhi government and the Centre strive to protect their interests and uphold the constitutionality of their actions.
