In a fresh jolt to the Arvind Kejriwal government, Delhi high court on Thursday set aside its order appointing 21 Aam Aadmi Party MLAs as parliamentary secretaries on the ground that it was issued without the concurrence of the Lieutenant Governor.
The order came around a month after the high court on August 4 held that the LG was the administrative head of the union territory of Delhi and his concurrence was "mandatory" in administrative issues.
A bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal set aside the March 13, 2015 order after the counsel appearing for the Delhi government "conceded" that it was issued without taking concurrence or views of the LG.
Senior advocate Sudhir Nandrajog, appearing for the Delhi government, referred to the August 4 verdict and said, "Today, I have to concede that the judgement stands against me (Delhi government)."
He said that the March 13, 2015 order, appointing 21 legislators as parliamentary secretaries, was issued without taking the concurrence or view of the LG.
Taking note of the submissions, the bench said, "it has been conceded by the GNCTD that order dated March 13, 2015 was issued without seeking concurrence/view of the LG. The impugned order of the GNCTD is set aside following the ratio laid down (in the August 4 verdict)."
READ: EXPLAINED: AAP's 21-MLA headache
The high court had passed the August 4 verdict on a batch of petitions arising out of the tussle between the Centre and the AAP government over LG's administrative powers on governance of the national capital.
During the hearing, Additional Solicitor General Sanjay Jain told the bench that the Election Commission was also seized of the matter pertaining to appointment of these legislators as parliamentary secretaries.
The court's order came on a petition by an NGO, Rashtriya Mukti Morcha, seeking quashing of the order.
The Election Commission had on August 29 reserved its order on a plea by 21 AAP legislators, who had questioned the maintainability of a petition seeking their disqualification for holding the post of parliamentary secretaries which was alleged to be an office of profit.
The Centre had on July 13 opposed the appointment of 21 parliamentary secretaries by the AAP government, saying the post neither finds place in the Constitution, nor does it find a place in the Delhi Members of Legislative Assembly (Removal of Disqualification) Act of 1997, except for the post of parliamentary secretary to the chief minister.
The ministry of home affairs had told the court that such an appointment was "not covered by the law."
The MHA had made the submission in an affidavit filed in response to the court's notice to the Centre on an NGO's plea.
In its affidavit, MHA had also said that Delhi government had tried to legalise the appointment of the 21 parliamentary secretaries by amending the Delhi Members of Legislative Assembly (Removal of Disqualification) Act, but the President has withheld his assent to the measure.
The Aam Aadmi Party government had earlier defended its order appointing the parliamentary secretaries, saying this was done to assist the ministers and ensure its harmonious functioning.
The AAP government had told the court that no office akin to the Council of Ministers has been created and no additional hierarchy was being imposed upon the legislative assembly.
It had also stated that the parliamentary secretaries were not given any access to confidential documents which are exclusively within the domain of the Minister.
The NGO had claimed in its plea that the Chief Minister had issued "unconstitutional and illegal order" in gross violation of the constitutional provisions and the Transaction of Business of Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi rules, 1993.
Denying the NGO's allegation, the Delhi government had said it was not bypassing the statutory functions of the LG.
