[Delhi government vs LG] Central government seeks reference to larger bench; says 2018 judgment incorrect, cannot hand over Delhi to anarchy

The hearing in the case in Supreme Court between the Central government and Delhi government regarding the administrative control over transfers and postings of civil servants in the national capital, took an interesting turn on Wednesday with the Central government seeking a reference of the matter to a larger bench. .A Constitution bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, and Justices MR Shah, Krishna Murari, Hima Kohli and PS Narasimha is presently hearing the matter.Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Central government, sought reference of the matter stating the 2018 Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court interpreting Article 239AA of the Constitution and laying down powers of the Delhi government, is not in tune with an earlier nine-judge bench judgment of the apex court.SG Mehta said that "we may not be remembered as handing over national capital to complete anarchy..The larger bench reference was sought on the ground that the 2018 judgment of the Constitution Bench in the case GNCTD vs Union of India is inconsistent with the nine-judge bench judgment in the case NDMC vs State of Punjab (1996) which had held that Delhi was on the same footing as a Union Territory. In the 2018 judgment, the Constitution Bench had asserted the principle of supremacy of elected government and held that the LG should act as per the aid and advise of the Council of Ministers in respect of the matters over which the Delhi Government has executive and legislative powers and that the LG's reference to the President should only be made in exceptional circumstances..When the matter was taken up today, SG Mehta sought permission to file a note containing a prayer for reference. "Please permit me to file a two page note on Prem Chand Jain judgment and why it is not good law. My note will also contain a prayer for reference," he said.The bench was, however, not impressed. "Reference was never argued (earlier). We are on rejoinder (arguments now). Mr Singhvi would have finished yesterday. How can you argue reference now," the CJI asked. "Contours of federalism between Centre and states need a re-look. That is why reference," the SG said."If issue of reference, we would have looked at it a different way. This was not covered in arguments," the CJI replied.Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing the Delhi government, also opposed the Centre's request."This matter had come before division bench at least for 10 times over a year. Not during any time was reference mentioned. 3.5 years after 2018 judgment... a review of that," he said.."I have argued all points of reference without mentioning reference in my arguments," the SG said."This will be hugely dilatory," Singhvi maintained. The SG, however, persisted saying that the national capital cannot be handed over to "anarchy". "It can be anything but dilatory. We are dealing with capital of the nation. My friend is in tremendous hurry, we may not be remembered as handing over the capital to complete anarchy," the SG replied"Can I please place a two page note on reference," the SG further requested."I strongly object. This will be made a ground for a future 9-judge reference," Singhvi vehemently argued."This is a question of law. You can circulate a note," the CJI replied. .The hearing is in progress.Read our coverage of Day 1 of the hearing here.Read our coverage of Day 2 of the hearing here.Read our coverage of Day 3 of the hearing here.Read our coverage of Day 4 of the hearing here.[Read live coverage of the hearing below]