Apex Court to hear Delhi govt’s plea against vesting L-G with power to appoint lawyers today

New Delhi: The Supreme Court is set to hear a significant plea from the Delhi government on Monday, contesting the Centre’s authority to allow the Lieutenant Governor (L-G) to appoint lawyers for the Delhi government. This legal challenge targets a 2017 office memorandum issued by the Union Home Ministry, which the Delhi government claims undermines its elected mandate.

A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Sanjay Kumar will preside over the case. The Delhi government argues that the memorandum and subsequent orders issued by the L-G significantly hinder its ability to represent the interests of the people of Delhi in legal matters. The petition emphasises that the elected government is effectively being stripped of its right to choose its legal representatives and determine their compensation.

The issue came to the forefront earlier this year, when the Supreme Court requested responses from both the Central government and the Delhi L-G regarding this contentious matter. This response follows the Delhi government’s plea to challenge the Central government’s decision to bestow upon the L-G the power to appoint lawyers for constitutional courts. Senior advocates Shyam Divan and Siddhartha Dave represented the Delhi government during the hearing.

The Delhi government’s petition specifically critiques the powers granted to the L-G, stating that it not only prevents the government from appointing counsel of its choice but also restricts its authority to set fees for these lawyers. “The popularly elected Government of the NCT of Delhi is crippled. The impugned OM and other orders severely obstruct the elected government’s ability to represent the interests of the electorate of Delhi,” the petition asserts.

Moreover, the plea highlights ongoing litigation between the Delhi government and the Central government, centering on their power struggle, particularly regarding the control of services, including Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officers in the capital. The Delhi government argued that if the authority to appoint and fix fees for its lawyers is retained by the Central government, it would effectively enable the Centre to dictate terms not only for its own lawyers but also for the opposition, violating fundamental principles of the rule of law.

This case is emblematic of the broader tensions between the Delhi government and the Centre, reflecting ongoing disputes over governance and autonomy in the national capital.