Tuesday started with a big win for Puducherry Chief Minister V Narayanasami. The Madras High Court ruled that the Lieutenant Governor cannot interfere in the daily affairs of an elected government in Puducherry.
The verdict of the Court meant at least a temporary end to a longstanding tussle between the LG of Puducherry Kiran Bedi and Narayanasami over his complaints of Kiran Bedi interfering in the functioning of the government. The court made it clear on Tuesday that the LG shall abide by the decisions taken by the Legislative Assembly of Puducherry, which is put in place by the people through elections.
The case dates back to 2017, when K Lakshminarayanan, an MLA representing the Raj Bhavan constituency filed a petition in the High Court stating that the LG conducting review meetings with officers and giving on-the-spot orders tantamounts to running a parallel government.
References to the case of NCT of Delhi
During the hearing, the personal secretary of the LG had submitted to the court that the LG has special powers granted by law and that as an administrator of the union territory, the LG had the powers to conduct meetings and ask for documents from the government.
Meanwhile the government of India through the Home Ministry had also stated that the MLA did not have the locus standi to file a petition regarding this and hence sought the court to dismiss the petition.
However, the court, in its Tuesday’s order recorded in detail, its observations and conclusions on the case, drawing parallels and sufficiently differentiating it from the case involving the government of the National Capital Territory (NCT) of Delhi and the Lieutenant Governor of NCT of Delhi.
The court had to bring in the case of NCT of Delhi because the counsel for the LG of Puducherry had taken the judgment of Delhi High Court in the NCT of Delhi case, where the High Court had ordered that the LG wielded more authority in Delhi and that he was not bound to the ‘aid and advice’ of the Council of Ministers.
The Madras High Court, however, was quick to record that the decision of the Delhi High Court was overturned by the Supreme Court in 2018 and had stated that LG has not been entrusted with any independent decision making power; he/she has to either act on the 'aid and advice' of the Council of Ministers or is bound to implement the decision taken by the President on a reference being made by the Lieutenant Governor.
“As a natural corollary, the Union Territory of Puducherry stands on a different footing from other UTs of Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Daman and Diu, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Lakshadweep and Chandigarh. However, we may hasten to add that Puducherry cannot be compared with the NCT of Delhi as it is solely governed by the provisions of Article 239-A,” reads the order of the Supreme Court on the NCT of Delhi case.
But this was again opposed by the counsel for LG of Puducherry stating that under the Transaction of Business Rules, higher powers were granted to administrator of Puducherry than those given to LG of NCT, specifically relating to legislative, financial and discretionary powers.
Legal basis for the powers of LG
Puducherry is a union territory which is governed by Article 239A of the Constitution. NCT of Delhi, meanwhile, is governed by Article 239AA of the Constitution which imposes restrictions on the law making power of the elected legislature of Delhi.
According to Article 239AA, the elected legislature of NCT of Delhi cannot enact laws relating to entries 1,2 and 18 of the state list. It means that Delhi’s elected government cannot make laws concerning public order, police and land rights. This is not the case with Puducherry.
According to 239A which governs the administration of Puducherry, the administrator (LG) does not have power to promulgate any ordinance in Puducherry. Even if LG does it, it will not stand if the Legislative Assembly decides to disapprove it. This emphasizes the supremacy of the legislature over the administrator in Puducherry, unlike the restrictions on the government of NCT Delhi.
According to Article 240, even the rights of the President of India is curtailed to the point that he/she cannot issue ordinances to suit their whims and fancies.
“Therefore the President or the Administrator cannot step into the shoes of the Legislature and the discretion to issue ordinance is also subject to constitutional limitations with regard to Union Territory of Puducherry. Pertinent it is to mention here that the Union Territory of Puducherry and the National Capital Territory of Delhi are treated differently under the Constitution on comparison with other Union Territories. This Court in the light of the above provisions hold that in view of the Constitutional Scheme, the role of the administrator, is only limited,” reads Tuesday’s order.
Reactions to the judgment
Minutes after Justice R Mahadevan delivered the order, the office of the LG in Puducherry released a statement reacting to it.
“We are examining the Judgement. After which we shall take a view. Meanwhile we are still in the Model Code of Conduct of Elections period. Files which require Lt Governor’s approval such as service matters, of promotions, appointments, disciplinary matters and financial sanctions for Grants in Aid are being received and being examined and cleared on merits of each case. The weekly disposal is also placed on record as was the earlier practice,” it stated.
Chief Minister V Narayanasami said that the order of the High Court reflects the principles expressed in the judgment of the Supreme Court in the NCT of Delhi case. “The decisions taken by an elected government is final. LG does not have the authority to interfere in that decision. LG does not have separate powers either. LG must not act in a manner that is detrimental to the development of the state,” he said. He added that the High Court order reaffirmed that the elected government of Puducherry had all the rights concerning the territory. “It is a landmark judgment. It is a victory of the people of Puducherry and of democracy," he said.