Delhi High Court on Tuesday asked a petitioner to withdraw his plea that questioned the power of the lieutenant governor to refer certain bills to the central government before these are tabled in the assembly. The court’s order came as ‘circumstances have changed’ since Arvind Kejriwal resigned as Delhi chief minister.
The court was hearing a PIL filed by petitioner RK Kapoor on 14 February, seeking directions to declare as unconstitutional the Rule 55 of the Transaction of Business of the Government of National Capital Territory (NCT) of Delhi. The rule requires the L-G to refer to the central government certain legislative proposals, including financial bills, before they are introduced in the assembly.
Acting Chief Justice BD Ahmed and Justice Siddharth Mridul asked Kapoor to withdraw the PIL as it has become futile after Kejriwal’s resignation. ‘You should withdraw the petition because of the changed circumstances. The matter is now of academic interest only. The liberty is granted to approach the court if need arises. The petition is dismissed as withdrawn,’ said the bench.
The central government told the court that the Jan Lokpal Bill was a financial bill and required L-G’s nod before it was tabled in the assembly.
The court was hearing a PIL filed by petitioner RK Kapoor on 14 February, seeking directions to declare as unconstitutional the Rule 55 of the Transaction of Business of the Government of National Capital Territory (NCT) of Delhi. The rule requires the L-G to refer to the central government certain legislative proposals, including financial bills, before they are introduced in the assembly.
Acting Chief Justice BD Ahmed and Justice Siddharth Mridul asked Kapoor to withdraw the PIL as it has become futile after Kejriwal’s resignation. ‘You should withdraw the petition because of the changed circumstances. The matter is now of academic interest only. The liberty is granted to approach the court if need arises. The petition is dismissed as withdrawn,’ said the bench.
The central government told the court that the Jan Lokpal Bill was a financial bill and required L-G’s nod before it was tabled in the assembly.