AAP Resignation wrt Jan Lokpal Bill: The Legal Controversy

The AAP government’s resignation wrt Jan Lokpal Bill is connected to the message sent by the lt. governor (LG) to the Delhi legislative assembly u/s 9 of the GNCTD Act, 1991. In his message, the LG stated that the bill was not sent to him for his prior consent as required u/s 22 of the GNCTD Act, 1991, for the bill was in the nature of a financial bill. Thus, he couldn’t make a prior reference to the central government under rule 55(1) of the Transaction of Business of the GNCT Rules, 1991 (TBR).

The rule 55(1) of the TBR inter alia requires the money bills and any other bills ultimately requiring additional financial assistance through substantive expenditure from the consolidated fund of the capital, to be referred to the central government by the LG. The AAP, inter alia, objects to the prior reference of money bills and other financial bills to the central government. The ground for objection is that it is against the mandate of the constitution u/a 239AA of the Indian Constitution, which is a special provision with respect to the NCTD.

AAP Resignation wrt Jan Lokpal Bill: The Legal Opinions

AAP has taken legal opinions from various legal experts with respect to the TBR. The AAP has, however, neither challenged the provisions of the GNCTD Act, 1991, in any of the public debates nor received any legal opinion with respect to the same. I find Justice Mudgal’s legal opinion to be a balanced one. It is also representative of the opinions of the other legal experts.

Justice Mudgal has opined that the rule is ultra vires to the extent that it refers the matters which are not in the nature of taxation, trade, and commerce. It is evident from Justice Mudgal’s opinion that his opinion is based on the wholesome reading of the rule 55(1) applying the rule of ejusdem generis, thus reading down other parts of the rule in light of article 286, 287, 288 and 304 of the Indian Constitution.

The Author’s Comments

Well, I think, the three sub-rules of the rule 55(1) deal with completely different aspects, and, in fact, the first sub-rule per se deal with two different aspects. The TBR have been framed u/s 44 of the GNCTD Act, and, in particular, the rule 55(1) falls under the chapter dealing with the procedure to be adopted in the cases of difference of opinions between the council of ministers/minister and the LG. Section 46 of the GNCTD Act gives power to the LG to make rules with the prior approval of the president with respect to the following:

• The custody of the consolidated fund of the capital.
• The payment of moneys into such funds.
• The withdrawal of money there from.
• All other matters connected with or ancillary to the above matters.

It seems that the Jan Lokpal Bill required the prior reference to the central government because it was withdrawing from the consolidated fund, with respect to which the rules have to be framed with the prior approval of the president u/s 46 of the GNCTD Act.

I would ignore that the rule 55(1), which should have been framed under section 46, the GNCTD Act, has instead been framed under section 44, the GNCTD Act. The two sections can be read together, and thus so read, the rule so framed would be valid. As already stated, AAP has not challenged any provision of the GNCTD Act; thus the rule, so framed, is valid and constitutional.

Actually, there is no need to get involved in so many technicalities. The issue is straightforward. Who should have the final word over the consolidated fund of GNCTD? The answer is obvious in the current paradigm when the NCTD is not a full state.

External Links

Please visit the following links:

Business of Transaction Rules for the NCTD
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3C_zx4dsPdWc3BHWHIyNXR0LUU/edit?usp=sharing

Justice Mudgal’s opinion

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3C_zx4dsPdWSXhhVG45dGNCbmM/edit?usp=sharing

Unfortunately, I have not been able to access the draft of the Jan Lokpal Bill attempted to be introduced in the assembly; therefore, I can’t comment on the validity of the LG’s letter.

© 2014 Ankur Mutreja