08 Aug 2024 : The Hindu Editorial

Editorial 1: Under overlords: On Centre-Delhi government relations

Introduction

Recently, the Supreme Court of India’s pronounced a verdict that the Lieutenant Governor (L-G) of Delhi exercises independent authority while appointing aldermen to the Delhi Municipal Corporation. The judgment by a three-judge Bench rightly relies on the letter of the law governing Centre-Delhi government relations, as well as earlier judgments that sought to strike a balance between the elected regime and the appointed administrator.

Key details of Supreme Court ruling w.r.t Governors exercise of power in Delhi

• State assembly’s relevancy: The litigation raises questions about the relevance of having an elected Assembly for Delhi.
• Governor’s statutory duty: As upheld by Court, the Lt. Governor has the power to appoint persons with special knowledge in municipal administration, and is not one that he should exercise on the basis of advice from Delhi’s Council of Ministers.
• Exception to the constitutional provision: That the L-G is bound by the aid and advice of Delhi’s Council of Ministers on all matters in the State and Concurrent Lists, except for the subjects of public order, police and land.
• Upholding LG’s Power: The Court has rejected the Delhi government’s argument that municipal administration, being a State subject, the L-G could not have acted on his own.

What does Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 say?

• Appointing power: Court noted that the Act identifies different authorities, each with distinct roles.
• Administrator’ Power: He is empowered to nominate 10 persons with special knowledge,
• Speaker’s Power: He could nominate some legislators to serve on the Corporation by rotation, which shows that it was an independent statutory power.
• Framework sought by the Constitution Bench in 2018 : To avoid escalation of issues that arise from differences of opinion between the L-G and the Chief Minister. Such differences, as well as political acrimony between the political parties have been the principal driving force behind multiple conflicts and legal tussles over governing Delhi.

Conclusion

However, in the ultimate analysis, it is the Centre that enjoys the final say. As the latest verdict on aldermen shows, the Constitution allows Parliament power to enact laws in respect of any matter on which the Delhi Assembly has jurisdiction, unlike other States which have an exclusive legislative domain. Parliament can also amend or supersede any law made by the Delhi Assembly. As legislative and executive powers are coextensive, this effectively means that the Delhi government can be undermined in any way the Centre wants. Constitutional morality and spirit of co-operative federalism should be energized to ensure healthy LG-CM relationship.

Editorial 2: A case of excesses: On the Puja Khedkar case

Introduction

Khedkar’s entry in civil services calls into question the recruitment process. In an outlandish tale of Puja Khedkar, the multiple methods by which she stepped outside the law and violated norms, rules, and ethics of the service she was appointed for. Thereby, conniving and scheming to deceive the entire Union Public Service Commission recruitment infrastructure, it presents a scenario that is too chilling for comfort.

“Even one egregious violation of the rule can cast shade on the entire process.”

 The curious case of Puja Khedkar

• Faking the documents: She claimed mental illness, and visual impairment, faked a community certificate, used a disability certificate to get chosen, having scored a rank she was not deserving.
• Faking the illness: The hospital in Pune which issued her a disability certificate said it had certified a 7% locomotor disability and that would have been practically useless in gaining concessions, as a higher degree of disability was required to benefit.
• Injustice to authentic Beneficiaries: Considering how persons with a true disability must jump through hoops to merely get the disability certification, her ease of getting the certificate while faking disability, raises serious questions.
• Misusing position of authority: She milked the privilege stemming from her father’s position in the civil services to commandeer a series of benefits that she might have otherwise had no access to.
• Misusing Self-Identity: She fabricated OBC certificate; using multiple identities to write the tests, claiming falsely that her parents were divorced to overcome the creamy layer exclusion criteria.
• Degrading the ‘Spirit of Services’: She indulged flamboyantly in perks not assigned to her station as a probationer — installed a beacon on her private luxury sedan and illegally stuck a Maharashtra government sticker on it.
• Cancellation: She will soon receive an order cancelling her candidature for violations.

There is no merit in arguing that she might be just one aberration, because her excesses and those of her parents’ have happened as the UPSC remained completely oblivious and unable to detect fraud which is not excusable.

Conclusion

It has admittedly not been a good year for qualification examinations in the country, with controversies dogging medical admissions with NEET UG, NEET PG and the Common University Entrance Test (CUET) for admission into central universities. The government now needs to ensure that the entire competitive examination system receives a thorough overhaul. Administrators and systems must not be gullible or unequipped to meet new challenges thrown up by contestants and emerging technology. Meanwhile, the government must cast its eye on the disability certification process, making sure that genuine applicants are fairly dealt with. This will help in reducing the trust deficit between government and citizens, particularly –  the innocent-hard working students.