HC Judgement on role of Delhi Lt. Governor | A real setback for Kejriwal?

The Delhi High Court minutes ago said that the Lieutenant Governor is mainly in charge of Delhi; and whatever Arvind Kejriwal and his party AAP may think, the real Boss of Delhi is the Lieutenant Governor.

Many are seeing it as a major setback for Arvind Kejriwal and his party in his long drawn war with the Centre.

Why? As the judgment vindicates the Centre’s stand that irrespective of Kejriwal and his party’s linking, the Government needs Lt. Governor’s approval for everything. Alright, most of the things. So it’s time for Kejriwal to eat all of his tweets scattered all over Web.

Now, the question is : Is it a real setback for Kejriwal?

Actually not.

From the very beginning, it was clear that since Delhi is not a full state (still a Union Territory in many respects), the Centre rules over it through Lt. Governor, its Agent.

What Kejriwal did all this while, is bring into debate, how the Central Government is not allowing it to function, ever since AAP’s Government came to power. The topic has resonated well with the Youth, and they do buy the AAP’s stand.

Earlier it didn’t suit the BJP led Government at Centre. But now with the Punjab Assembly elections 2017 down the corner, such setbacks for AAP, benefit the BJP as well. The more the Central Government will attack AAP, the stronger the AAP will emerge in Punjab. Note that the Akali BJP Governmet in Punjab is already seeing a 10 year anti-incumbency. This means that it will be at a weak footing there. A strong AAP means vote loss to Congress. In the absence of AAP, Congress would be the natural choice.

If the situation remains the same. That’s if BJP continues to attack AAP in Delhi, then we are seeing either AAP making the Government in Punjab OR; vote scattered over four key political parties.

To conclude, Delhi High Court’s today’s verdict is very similar to the one given by the Uttarakhand High Court in the disqualification case of defecting MLAs of Congress. The similarity relates to how the perception the judgement creates.

In that case, you can criticize the Uttarakhand Assembly Speaker’s conduct as a speaker, on the ground that it set a wrong precedent. But you cannot call it un-constitutional. In the same manner, you can criticize Delhi HC’s today’s judgement as giving an approval to the Central Government’s high-handedness over a democratically elected AAP Gpvernment, but you cannot say the judgement doesn’t mirror what the Constitution prescribes.