n a recent turn of events, the Supreme Court of India passed a significant order on 11th May 2023 regarding the powers and responsibilities of the Delhi Government. This decision set off a chain of events that has intensified the ongoing power struggle between the elected Delhi government, led by Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, and the Lieutenant Governor (LG). The subsequent actions of both the Delhi government and the central government have further complicated matters, leaving the public to suffer the consequences.
THE SUPREME COURT ORDER
The Supreme Court’s ruling on 11th May 2023 addressed the powers and responsibilities of the Delhi government. While the details of the order may vary, it is essential to note that the court’s decision aimed to clarify the division of powers between the elected government and the LG. This order was expected to bring greater stability and clarity to the functioning of the Delhi administration.
KEJRIWAL GOVERNMENT’S PROMISE
Following the Supreme Court’s decision, the Kejriwal-led Delhi government expressed its commitment to accelerate development work in the national capital. The Chief Minister pledged to leverage the newfound clarity on powers and responsibilities to ensure that the government’s initiatives and policies would be implemented swiftly. This promise was met with hope and optimism from the public, who had long anticipated improved governance and accelerated progress.
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT’S ORDINANCE
Unfortunately, the optimism surrounding the Supreme Court’s order was short-lived. The central government, in an unexpected move, introduced an ordinance that challenged the judgment and gave more power to the LG. This ordinance, which was passed despite the ongoing power struggle, significantly complicated the already contentious relationship between the elected Delhi government and the nominated LG.
ESCALATION OF THE POWER STRUGGLE
With the central government’s intervention, the power struggle between the Delhi government and the LG reached new heights of complexity. The conflicting interpretations of the Supreme Court’s order and the subsequent ordinance led to a fierce battle for control over decision-making processes and administrative functions. This prolonged tug-of-war has left the public caught in the crossfire, resulting in delayed projects, policy paralysis, and bureaucratic inefficiencies.
PUBLIC SUFFERING AND IMPLICATIONS
The protracted power struggle has had a detrimental impact on the citizens of Delhi. The delay in critical developmental projects, such as infrastructure upgrades, healthcare reforms, and educational initiatives, has hindered the city’s progress. The lack of a cohesive decision-making process and constant policy changes have created confusion and hindered effective governance.
Moreover, the uncertainty surrounding the distribution of powers has left many important issues unresolved. The absence of clear accountability mechanisms has made it challenging to address pressing concerns and ensure efficient delivery of public services. The public, as the ultimate stakeholders, bears the brunt of this power struggle, with their needs and aspirations taking a backseat to political wrangling.
The ongoing power struggle between the elected Delhi government and the LG, exacerbated by the central government’s recent ordinance, has brought about a new level of complexity to the governance of the national capital. The Supreme Court’s initial order, which aimed to clarify powers and responsibilities, has been overshadowed by conflicting interpretations and competing political interests. As a result, the public is left suffering, with delayed development work and a lack of efficient governance. It is crucial for all parties involved to prioritize the well-being of the people and seek a resolution that promotes cooperative governance and accelerated development in Delhi. Only through collaboration and a shared commitment to public welfare can this power struggle be resolved for the betterment of the city and its residents.
Rajesh Sinha is an AAP leader and the views expressed are personal
