19/02/2019 - Indian Polity | Mainstorming

IAS Parliament 6 years

KEY POINTS

Key concerns

· The role of Lieutinant Governor with respect to union territories is not clearly mentioned in the Constitution of India.

· In case of Puducherry The Union Territories act 1963, allows the office discretionary powers, but these must be exercised judiciously and only in exceptional circumstances. This gets often misued leading to the tussle.

· The proposals LG of Puducherry has refused to approve the government initiative for free rice, undermining the elected legislative assembly.

· While the Supreme court judgement on Delhi LG has limited its powers this has not been done in case of Puducherry.

Supreme Court’s Ruling

· “Aid and advice” under Article 239AA means that the LG is bounded by the aid and advice of the elected government.

· LG has no independent decision making power and cannot act as an obstructionist to policy decisions taken by Government.

· LG cannot stall decisions mechanically, Government must be allowed to legislate and govern other issues.

· In case of Puducherry these guidelines have not been followed properly, the decisions by LG of Puducherry has been taken without the concurrence of Elected representatives.

· Thus the tussle between Chief Minister and LG undermines the democratic institutions enshrined in the constitution of India, leading to loss of trust on the Government by people.

· The Supreme court judgement applies equally to Puducherry and has to be taken into account by LG for robust functioning of democratic institutions.