239AA. Special provisions with respect to Delhi.
- (1) As from the date of commencement of the Constitution (Sixty-ninth Amendment) Act, 1991, the Union territory of Delhi shall be called the National Capital Territory of Delhi (hereafter in this Part referred to as the National Capital Territory) and the administrator thereof appointed under article 239 shall be designated as the Lieutenant Governor.
- (2)
- (a) There shall be a Legislative Assembly for the National Capital Territory and the seats in such Assembly shall be filled by members chosen by direct election from territorial constituencies in the National Capital Territory.
- (b) The total number of seats in the Legislative Assembly, the number of seats reserved for Scheduled Castes, the division of the National Capital Territory into territorial constituencies (including the basis for such division) and all other matters relating to the functioning of the Legislative Assembly shall be regulated by law made by Parliament.
- (c) The provisions of articles 324 to 327 and 329 shall apply in relation to the National Capital Territory, the Legislative Assembly of the National Capital Territory and the members thereof as they apply, in relation to a State, the Legislative Assembly of a State and the members thereof respectively; and any reference in articles 326 and 329 to “appropriate Legislature” shall be deemed to be a reference to Parliament.
- (3)
- (a) Subject to the provisions of this Constitution, the Legislative Assembly shall have power to make laws for the whole or any part of the National Capital Territory with respect to any of the matters enumerated in the State List or in the Concurrent List in so far as any such matter is applicable to Union territories except matters with respect to Entries 1, 2 and 18 of the State List and Entries 64, 65 and 66 of that List in so far as they relate to the said Entries 1, 2 and 18.
- (b) Nothing in sub-clause (a) shall derogate from the powers of Parliament under this Constitution to make laws with respect to any matter for a Union territory or any part thereof.
- (c) If any provision of a law made by the Legislative Assembly with respect to any matter is repugnant to any provision of a law made by Parliament with respect to that matter, whether passed before or after the law made by the Legislative Assembly, or of an earlier law, other than a law made by the Legislative Assembly, then, in either case, the law made by Parliament, or, as the case may be, such earlier law, shall prevail and the law made by the Legislative Assembly shall, to the extent of the repugnancy, be void:
Provided that if any such law made by the Legislative Assembly has been reserved for the consideration of the President and has received his assent, such law shall prevail in the National Capital Territory:
Provided further that nothing in this sub-clause shall prevent Parliament from enacting at any time any law with respect to the same matter including a law adding to, amending, varying or repealing the law so made by the Legislative Assembly.
- (4) There shall be a Council of Ministers consisting of not more than ten per cent. of the total number of members in the Legislative Assembly, with the Chief Minister at the head to aid and advise the Lieutenant Governor in the exercise of his functions in relation to matters with respect to which the Legislative Assembly has power to make laws, except in so far as he is, by or under any law, required to act in his discretion:
Provided that in the case of difference of opinion between the Lieutenant Governor and his Ministers on any matter, the Lieutenant Governor shall refer it to the President for decision and act according to the decision given thereon by the President and pending such decision it shall be competent for the Lieutenant Governor in any case where the matter, in his opinion, is so urgent that it is necessary for him to take immediate action, to take such action or to give such direction in the matter as he deems necessary.
- (5) The Chief Minister shall be appointed by the President and other Ministers shall be appointed by the President on the advice of the Chief Minister and the Ministers shall hold office during the pleasure of the President.
- (6) The Council of Ministers shall be collectively responsible to the Legislative Assembly.
- (7)
- (a) Parliament may, by law, make provisions for giving effect to, or supplementing the provisions contained in the foregoing clauses and for all matters incidental or consequential thereto.
- (b) Any such law as is referred to in sub-clause (a) shall not be deemed to be an amendment of this Constitution for the purposes of article 368 notwithstanding that it contains any provision which amends or has the effect of amending, this Constitution.
- (8) The provisions of article 239B shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the National Capital Territory, the Lieutenant Governor and the Legislative Assembly, as they apply in relation to the Union territory of Puducherry, the administrator and its Legislature, respectively; and any reference in that article to “clause (1) of article 239A” shall be deemed to be a reference to this article or article 239AB, as the case may be.
Can Central govt.bring any ordinance to curt short the decision making powers of Chief Minister of India who has been elected by the people of Delhi NCT WITHOUT bringing change in the Article 239aa of Indian Constitution first ?
Didn’t you read … Article says nothing in this article shall prevent the parliament to make laws on any subject with regard to any union territory or any part of it
Yes but according to the above article the Union Territory of Delhi would be referred to as the NCT,Look at Clause 1.
However the question Mr.Narender has asked does raise some doubt. It seems Clause 7 Sub-Clause b does allow the parliament to make supplementary laws to give effect to the aforementioned clause such law will not considered an amendment to the constitution. Thus,it would appear,the recent ordinance under Promulgated by the Union govt is constitutionally valid.
Can Central govt.bring any ordinance to curt short the decision making powers of Chief Minister of India who has been elected by the people of Delhi NCT WITHOUT bringing change in the Article 239aa of Indian Constitution first ?
Article 239aa(7) only protect laws give effect to above clauses and which supplements them but not which abrogates or amends them. Above ordinance must be passed through a constitutional amendment act to be legally valid. a senior advocate in
the Supreme Court of
India
Yes as the Central Govt can make ordinance which is for limited period and thereafter parliament can make laws on the subject if the bill is brought before it
power conferred on Parliament under Article 239AA(7)(a) is to make laws for giving effect to or supplementing the provisions contained in various clauses of Article 239AA and for all matters incidental or consequential thereto. Such a power cannot be pressed into action to amend Article 239AA(3)(a) of the
Constitution. Significantly, Article 239AA(7)(b) stipulates that Parliament’s law making under Article 239AA(7)(a) shall not be deemed to be an amendment of the Constitution for the purposes of Article 368. No such clause has been stipulated in Article 239AA(3)(a). Therefore, altering the scope of Article 239AA(3)(a) requires constitutional amendment under Article 368; there is not an iota of doubt. Consequently, the ordinance promulgated under Article 123 of the Constitution to expand the scope of excepted matters in Article 239AA(3)(a) is void ab initio and is liable to be struck down for bypassing constitutional
amendment. It amounts to a colourable exercise of power
Zyada na uchhal aaptard. Article 3(b) gives parliament the power to make any law on any subject matter. So if parliament makes law under article 3(b) on “services” then that law shall prevail over the state law. The ordinance is an exercise under arricle 3(b) and Supreme court does not need to go to article 7. A good lawyer from the side of union govt can make the judges understand that they are looking into things which are not at all in question.
The SC must also examine the urgency that prompted centre to promulgate an ordinance, ordinance promulgated only when there is political crisis especially emergency, in this case there was no such crisis, besides the SC had clearly interpreted the law in force. Besides this ordinance takes away the citizens right to chose govt of their choice. Ordinance detrimental to interest of citizens and misuse of power
There indeed was an emergency when kejariwal as his first act after supreme court order started removing officers of vigilance department which was looking into various frauds committed by his government
I can say this much that as and when the S C defined the powers of State Government and the limited powers of LG, Our Great CM, Delhi should not have come out with statements declaring action against those officials who were not in line with his wishes. Babus know which way to tilt. LG would also have come with the State Government for all legitimate actions, when persuaded with respect.
Judiciary role is to interpret the constitution as per procedure established by law and not as per due process of law. secondly, NCT of Delhi, no matter what still is a union territory and not a full fledged state, which means ultimate power of supervision lies with president through the lieutenant governor.
parliament reserves full rights to make laws w.r.t to any matter enumerated under central, state, concurrent as well as residual subjects w.r.t to Union territory. So parliament is well within its rights to do so.
Article 239AA 3(b & c) read with 239AA 7a & 7b makes it abundantly clear.
जब दिल्ली में सारे काम LG के अनुमति से ही होगें तो जिन प्रतिनिधियों एंव उनके लिडर को जनता ने चुना है तब उनका क्या काम विधानसभा को समाप्त कर देना चाहिए ।
क्या बिना विधान सभा का सदस्य हुए कोई दिल्ली का मुख्यमंत्री बन सकता है