Delhi services Bill tabled in LS amid Oppn protests, Amit Shah calls their dissent ‘political’

While the Opposition tore into the government, alleging that the Bill aims to take away Delhi Assembly’s powers, Union Home Minister Amit Shah, who was present in the House, said, “All objections raised are political, which do not have any Constitutional basis.”

The Centre had promulgated the Ordinance on May 19, 2023 — eight days after the Constitution Bench of Supreme Court pronounced its judgment in the Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India case, granting more powers to the Delhi government over services in the national capital.

The Bill was introduced by Minister of State for Home Affairs Nityanand Rai in Lok Sabha amid vociferous protests by Opposition members, led by Congress leader Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury, who raised objections to its introduction under Rule 72 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha.

Chowdhury said, “The Bill vindicates the outrageous infringement of this government upon the territory of states. It is the design of digging a graveyard for cooperative federalism.” He said services are a State subject under the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution and, therefore, the Delhi Assembly should have had a right to make a law regarding services without any obstacles.

Terming the objections “political”, the Home Minister said, “I want to clarify the issues raised by the Opposition regarding rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha. Our Constitution has given absolute power to this House to enact any law for Delhi state.”

Shah said the Opposition’s objections “do not have any basis as per rules of Parliamentary procedure. Therefore, leave should be granted to introduce the Bill before the House.”

Chowdhury, however, said the Bill is “a clear violation of the Constitution”, as, he pointed out, Article 239 provides powers to the Delhi Assembly to make laws on subjects mentioned in the State List and Concurrent List. “This raises serious questions about the Centre’s view of ignoring the Supreme Court and the Constitution,” he asserted. “This Bill aims at undermining the independence and rights of Delhi government, which was established by the Supreme Court judgment.”

By trying to alter the apex court’s verdict, and interfering in the matters of Delhi government, the Centre wants to “weaken the importance of federalism”, which is essential for our democracy, Chowdhury said. He also maintained that the Bill gives more powers to the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi.

Stating that he “vehemently” opposes the Bill, RSP member NK Premachandran said: “I am questioning the legislative competence of the government in having the legislation of Bill…. It is against the principles of federalism envisaged by the Constitution.” He noted that federalism is one of the basic features of the Constitution.

The intent of this Bill is to “override” the Supreme Court’s verdict of May 11, 2023, he said.

Intervening, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Pralhad Joshi said the House is “fully competent” to pass this Bill.

Asaduddin Owaisi of AIMIM also opposed introduction of the Bill and said it violates Article 123 of the Constitution and the theory of separation of powers. This House, he contested, does not have legislative competence.

Opposing introduction of the Bill, Trinamool Congress’s Sougata Ray said it is outside the legislative competence of Parliament. “To override the Supreme Court’s judgment, the government has brought forward a Bill. This is totally autocratic…” he said.

Gaurav Gogoi, Congress Deputy Leader of Lok Sabha, called the Bill “completely illegal”. Opposing its introduction, Gogoi said the Bill is a substantive motion on policy matters and it should not be passed before the no-confidence motion is disposed of.

Congress member Shashi Tharoor and DMK’s T R Baloo also opposed introduction of the Bill.

Biju Janata Dal member Pinaki Misra said that on a point of law, the Opposition cannot oppose the introduction of the Bill, as the House has legislative competence. Referring to para 95 of the Supreme Court judgment, Misra said, “The government has brought out a law now at perusal to the Supreme Court empowering it. So how can you challenge the Executive’s legislative competence?”

Speaking on the Opposition’s contention that the Bill “overrides” the Supreme Court judgment, Shah said, “As our colleague from BJD (Misra) said earlier, the Supreme Court has clearly said in para 6, 95 and 164F of its judgment that Parliament can enact any law for the Union Territory of Delhi.”

Soon after the Bill was introduced, Speaker Om Birla warned Opposition members and said if they do not maintain decorum in the House he would have no option but to name a few members. When Opposition members continued shouting slogans, he adjourned the House until 3 pm.