We have serious doubts on legality and validity of your powers: SC to Delhi L-G V K Saxena

Senior advocate Sanjay Jain appearing for the LG said the petition is not maintainable as only an election petition could have been filed to challenge the election.

Justice Narasimha, however, said, “Our initial view too was why an Article 32 petition? But after looking into it, we think this is a matter where we have to issue notice, particularly in view of manner in which the powers under Section 487 was exercised.”

Notwithstanding the objections raised by Jain, Justice Narasimha asked, “What is the tearing hurry (in holding the election)?”

The judges added that there are also issues with respect to the nomination part of the election.

Pointing out that the “Mayor is to preside the meeting”, Justice Narasimha asked, “Where do you get the power to interdict all this under Section 487 which is an executive power. It is not to interfere with legislative functions… What happens to democracy if you keep interfering like this?”

“This is not the way 487 can be used…it is wrong,” added Justice Narasimha.

Appearing for Oberoi, senior advocate A M Singhvi urged the bench to direct that the elections for the chairperson of the Standing Committee be not held in the meantime.

The Court orally asked Jain to refrain from holding the Chairperson election till it hears the matter again. The high court will take it up next after two weeks.

To Jain’s argument that the MCD mayor had flouted the Representation of People Act, the bench said it had reservations about her conceit, but will examine the LG’s actions too. Jain also submitted that the mayor had postponed the election to October 5 violating the Supreme Court’s August 5 direction to fill up the vacancy within a month.

The seat had fallen vacant after Kamaljeet Sehrawat, Municipal Councillor, Ward No. 120 (Dwarka-B), won the Lok Sabha election.