Supreme Court of India.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued notices to the Lieutenant Governor and the pro tem presiding officer of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), saying that the Constitution does not give the nominated members of the municipality the right to vote in the meetings. For the third time in a row, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has accused the mayor of deliberately stalling the election.
Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud remarked at the preliminary hearing, “There is a huge difference between you (elected members) and them (nominated members).”
A three-judge bench listed the matter for detailed hearing on February 13.
AAP’s mayoral candidate Shaili Oberoi had approached the Supreme Court on January 27, seeking expeditious and timely holding of mayoral elections to the House twice – on January 6 and January 24. He later withdrew the petition seeking permission to approach the court again in the matter. Aldermen were allowed to vote.
Soon after the House was adjourned on February 6, senior AAP leader Manish Sisodia had said that the party would seek the intervention of the Supreme Court for the fair conduct of the mayoral elections.
‘Presiding Officer Illegal’
On Wednesday, senior advocate AM Singhvi, appearing for Ms Oberoi, urged that the matter pertains to the “subversion of democracy”. He said that Article 243U of the Constitution states that the election for the formation of municipality should be completed on time.
Mr Singhvi pointed out that the MCD elections were to be held on December 4, 2022, but subsequently the elections to the offices of mayor, deputy mayor and members of standing committees were held up three times.
He said that the Presiding Officer pro tem has allowed the nominated members to vote in direct violation of Article 243R(2)(iv) of the Constitution.
At this point Justice PS Narasimha remarked, “It is not just a statute, the Constitution itself does not allow them to vote.”
Mr. Singhvi argued that the presiding officer pro tem [BJP’s Satya Sharma] himself is “illegal” because he is not the senior-most member.
“Then it orders the simultaneous holding of all the three elections of the Mayor, the Deputy Mayor and the members of the Standing Committees. There is a provision directly that it cannot be done,” he submitted.
“Whereas in accordance with Section 76 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, the Mayor, or in his absence the Deputy Mayor, is to preside over every meeting of the Corporation, as well as the election of the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and members. STANDING COMMITTEES LAW are in direct contradiction to the provisions of the Act,” the court recorded Mr Singhvi’s contention in its order.
On Tuesday, AAP’s chief spokesperson Saurabh Bhardwaj said the party had shared with the apex court evidence of the BJP-led Center trying to “form its government within the MCD through unfair means”.
The results of the MCD elections were declared on 7 December. In the 250-wards house, the AAP won a majority with 134 wards, followed by the BJP with 104 wards.