LG can refer matters to President, but not as routine: Justice Ashok Bhushan

The Delhi Lieutenant Governor, who is bound by the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, has the power to refer any legislative matter to the President for consideration, but not as a routine, the Supreme Court held today.

The apex court's decision was a major departure from what the Delhi High Court had held in August 2016 on the powers of LG and the ruling executive in the national capital.

Justice Ashok Bhushan, part of the five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, which delivered the landmark verdict, in his separate but concurring judgement said that according to the constitutional provisions, executive decisions need not be taken with the concurrence of the LG.

The LG only needs to be kept informed about all the proposals, agendas of meeting and decisions taken, Justice Bhushan said and clarified that the purpose of communication was "not to obtain concurrence", but to enable the LG to exercise his powers of Presidential reference, if required.

Justice Bhushan, in his 123-page verdict, said that once the communication has been "seen" by the LG, the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) can immediately implement the administrative decisions.

"Only a reasonable time gap is to elapse, which is sufficient for the LG to scrutinise the decision," he said and added "when LG has seen a decision and does not decide to make a reference, the decision has to be implemented by all means".

"We are, thus, of the view that the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Act, 1991 and Transaction of Business of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Rules, 1993 cover the entire gamut, manner and procedure of executive decisions taken by the Council of Ministers/Minister their communication, and implementation and the entire administration is to be run accordingly," the apex court said.

It also said that the interpretation of the Constitution has to be "purposive" by taking into consideration the need of the time and the constitutional principles. However, it also said that for adopting the purposive interpretation of a particular provision, "the express language employed cannot be given a complete go-bye".

On the issue of who can make laws for GNCTD regarding matters mentioned in the State and Concurrent lists of the Constitution, the apex court said that both Parliament and the Legislative Assembly of Delhi had these powers.

However, the Legislative Assembly of Delhi cannot make law on the matters pertaining to police, public order and land, the court said.