Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

Senior Advocate Rajiv Nayar appearing for Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) Leader Jasmine Shah submitted before the Delhi High Court on Thursday that the Delhi Lieutenant Governor (LG) Vinai Kumar Saxena did not follow proper procedure while referring the case to the President of India and that it was not as per law.

The bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh was hearing a plea by Jasmine Shah against the Lieutenant Governor's order restricting him from discharging his functions and duties as Vice-Chairperson of the Dialogue and Development Commission of Delhi (DDCD). Shah through his plea had sought quashing of the aforesaid order.

During the hearing, Senior Advocate Rajiv Nayar appearing for Shah submitted that proper procedure was not followed by the LG in referring the matter to the President of India and that it was not made as per the Rules of Transaction of Business (Amendment), 2021.

The senior counsel contended that neither the LG nor the Director of Planning had the authority to prevent Shah from carrying out his duties, that the power rests with the Legislative Assembly, and also that the power of appointment and removal rests solely with the Delhi Government.

Nayar contended that: “We have a situation where I have prima facie shown that except for entries 1, 2, and 18, the power is with the legislative assembly. It lies squarely within the scope of the appointment of the Delhi Government. The impugned order itself recognizes that Chief Minister alone can remove.”

Furthermore, he argued, “Justice DY Chandrachud’s concurring opinion in the Constitution Bench judgment says that the difference of opinion cannot be a contrived difference. The Bench has said that the course of action mandated in the transaction of business (amendment) rules, 2021 must be followed... It is only after the consultation with the council of ministers that the matter goes to the President”.

Noting that Nayar had concluded his arguments, Justice Singh listed the matter for further hearing on March 15 for submissions of Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Sanjay Jain appearing for the LG.

It is to be noted that on December 13, Justice Singh was informed through an affidavit filed by the Director (Planning) of the Delhi government that as per Article 239AA of the Constitution of India, the LG had ordered that Shah be barred from entering the DDCD office until the President makes a decision on the matter.

Earlier, in November, the Delhi Government informed the High Court that it has directed the planning department to “rescind orders” restricting Shah, Vice-Chairperson of the DDCD from using his office, as well as the order of the LG wherein he requested the Delhi CM to remove Shah from his post for allegedly misusing public office.

Shah had moved the High Court against LG’s decision, barring him from using “any privileges in the office of VC, DDDC, with immediate effect”.

The action against Shah was taken after a complaint was made by Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP) MP Parvesh Verma, where he stated that Shah while working as the VC of DDDC, acted as the official spokesperson of the Aam Aadmi Party, which violates the law.

Jasmine Shah joined AAP in 2014 and was appointed as the Vice-Chairperson of the DDDC in 2018.

Case Title: Jasmine Shah v. Director (Planning) Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Statute: Rules of Transaction of Business (Amendment), 2021