2-May-2019: Madras High Court curbs LG's role in Puducherry administration

The Madras High Court ruled that the Lieutenant Governor of Puducherry should not interfere in the day-to-day administration of the Union Territory.

The ruling comes as a serious setback to the incumbent Lieutenant Governor (L-G) of Puducherry, Kiran Bedi. She has been locked in a prolonged dispute, over the extent of her powers, with Chief Minister V. Narayanasamy. The CM has been reporting that the LG was disregarding the elected regime and seeking to run the Union Territory on her own.

High Court's ruling:

• The constant interference from the L-G would amount to running a “parallel government,” when an elected government was in place.
• The Administrator is bound by the ‘aid and advice’ clause in matters over which the Assembly is competent to enact laws.
• The government secretaries are bound to take instructions from and report to the Council of Ministers, headed by the Chief Minister.
• The secretaries are not empowered to issue orders on their own or upon the instructions of the Administrator (L-G).
• The Court also disapproved of the alleged practice of government officials being part of social media groups.
• Through these, the L-G was issuing instructions to them for redress of public grievances.
• The court reminded that they were bound to use only authorised medium of communication for purposes of administration.
• The L-G’s power to refer any matter to the President to resolve differences should not mean “every matter”.
• The High Court has reminded the Centre and the Administrator that they should be true to the concept of democratic principles.
• This is essential to uphold the constitutional scheme based on democracy and republicanism.
• The HC's ruling is inspired by the Supreme Court’s earlier appeal to constitutional morality and trust among high dignitaries.

An earlier SC judgement came in relation to the conflict between the elected regime in the National Capital Territory (NCT) of Delhi and its Lt. Governor. It ruled that the L-G has to act on the ‘aid and advice’ of the Council of Ministers. It has to refer to the President for a decision on any matter where there is a difference with the Ministry. But, clearly, the Lt. Governor has no independent decision-making powers.

The apex court has clearly held that there is a distinction between the National Capital Territory of Delhi and Puducherry. The Puducherry legislature was created through a parliamentary law, based on an enabling provision in Article 239A of the Constitution. On the other hand, the NCT legislature has been created by the Constitution itself under Article 239AA.

At the same time, the NCT Assembly is limited in the extent of its legislative powers. It is barred from dealing with the subjects of public order, police and land.

There are no such restrictions imposed explicitly in the case of Puducherry under Article 239A. The Article symbolises the supremacy of the Legislature above the Administrator in case of the Union Territory of Puducherry. Given the Business Rules and other statutory provisions, Puducherry deserves a greater credence to the concept of a representative government. With this explanation, the Court has set aside two clarifications issued by the Centre in 2017. They had stated that the L-G enjoyed more power than the Governor of a State and could act without aid and advice.

11-Feb-2019: Bill to counter exploitation by NRI spouses

In a bid to counter growing incidents of exploitation of Indian women by NRI (Non Resident Indian) spouses, External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj introduced a Bill in the Rajya Sabha.

The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) stated that the Bill will create accountability and protect those who are trapped in fraudulent marriages and are abandoned by their spouses.

According to the new Bill, a marriage between an NRI and an Indian citizen will have to be registered within 30 days from the date of marriage. Necessary legal provisions have been created in the criminal code and the Passports Act, 1967, to initiate action against erring NRI spouses.

The introduction of the Bill was necessitated by the Ministry of External Affairs due to numerous complaints received from Indian nationals, mostly women deserted or harassed by their Non-Resident Indian spouses.

The Bill, which has been championed by the MEA, the Ministry of Women and Child Development (MoWCD), Ministry of Home Affairs (MoHA) and Ministry of Law and Justice (MoLJ) is aimed at preventing victimisation of Indian nationals in fraudulent marriages.

It is expected that the Bill will serve as a deterrent for NRI spouses, who use marriages as a tool of exploitation.