After liquor policy, AAP and Delhi LG lock horns over 'Khadi scam'
An ideal working relationship between the elected Aam Aadmi party government and the Delhi Lieutenant Governor always seemed too much of an ask. The events of Monday – L-G VK Saxena sending a legal notice to five AAP leaders to stop levelling defamatory allegations and issue an apology have just exacerbated the ongoing tussle.
The L-G issued the notice through his lawyer, advocate Bani Diksit to the AAP functionaries- MLAs Atishi, Durgesh Pathak, Saurab Bharadwaj, MP Sanjay Singh and DDC vice-chairperson Jasmine Shah. The notice alleged that AAP circulated pieces of false information not only to taint the image of L-G Saxena but also to downplay his credibility.
“…tainted with the objective of digressing the attention of the people in view of the recent law enforcement actions having been taken against its senior leader(s),” the notice stated.
Also read: Sack Delhi LG for illegal award of contract to daughter during his term at KVIC: AAP to PM Modi
The latest flashpoint
The AAP legislators have accused the L-G of being involved in a “scam” where two cashiers had allegedly exchanged demonetised banknotes at Khadi Gram Udyog Bhavan in 2016. The functionaries have also alleged that he had given the contract to design the Khadi Lounge in Mumbai to his daughter without a tender.
Saxena as the chairman of Khadi and Village Industries Commission had forced his employees to exchange his old and unaccounted banknotes, AAP has alleged.
“Khadi stores had stopped accepting old currency, but VK Saxena forced the cashiers to take his cash and get it exchanged as if it belonged to Khadi. Two cashiers of Khadi exposed the scam. But VK Saxena oversaw the investigation and acted upon their allegations by suspending them. Saxena rinsed the allegations to an extent that CBI never ever mentioned his name in the case,” AAP MLA, Durgesh Pathak told the Delhi Assembly.
Also read: AAP biggest U-turn party in human history, says BJP
Bone of contention
The AAP dispensation has been facing immense heat over the past few weeks from Saxena’s office over allegations of corruption in the now revoked liquor policy. L-G green-lighted the initiation of an investigation against Delhi Deputy CM Manish Sisodia, who also holds the excise portfolio, followed by action against the officials who had played a key role in formulating the liquor policy of 2021-2022. After CBI, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) conducted multiple raids across states on Tuesday morning in connection with the controversial liquor policy.
Under the new liquor policy, licences of 849 liquor shops were issued to private firms through open bidding. However, on July 30, the AAP government withdrew the new liquor policy after the L-G recommended an inquiry into it by the CBI.
As a public representative, Hon’ble CM needs to explain to the people ‘his art’ of converting Rs 17 lakhs, ascertained by CBI as demonetised currency exchanged by 2 employees of Khadi Bhawan Delhi, into Rs 1400 Cr as claimed by AAP.
— LG Delhi (@LtGovDelhi) September 1, 2022
Sisodia’s retort
On Monday, Sisodia claimed that CBI officer Jitendra Kumar, who was the deputy legal advisor with the anti-corruption branch of CBI, died by suicide as he was being pressured to frame a false case against him for arrest. However, the CBI was quick to issue a readout debunking Sisodia’s charges and saying that the officer concerned was in no way connected to the ongoing investigations.
Also read: BJP’s sting operation on liquor scam a joke: Delhi Deputy CM Sisodia
CBI version
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), however, said it had not found the role of any individuals other than the two suspended cashiers of Khadi Gramodyog Bhavan, who allegedly converted ₹17.07 lakh of old currency to new notes after demonetisation. According to the CBI, the cashiers had deposited ₹17.07 lakh in demonetised currency notes in Khadi Gram Udyog Bhavan’s account maintained with State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur between November 9 and December 31, 2016, in violation of the instructions issued by the government.
Unending power struggle in Delhi
The ongoing acrimony between the elected Delhi government and the Centre-appointed administrator, the L-G, isn’t a new one; though it may seem far more pronounced today than it was when the Congress or BJP ruled the city-state prior to AAP’s first majority government in 2015. The political brinkmanship between the AAP-led Delhi government and the BJP-led Centre aside, this acrimony has its roots in the complex power arithmetic and multiplicity of agencies that govern the city-state. While the Centre, through various agencies and the L-G, has control over public order, land and the police while the Delhi government, at least in theory, has control over the remaining subjects of governance.
The Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Act, which lays out the broad outline of the separation of powers between the Delhi government and the L-G, was amended by the Centre in 2021. The 2021 amendments were meant to give wide-ranging powers to L-G overriding a 2018 landmark constitution bench judgment by the Supreme Court that had sought to settle this debate over separation of powers by asserting that, barring issues of public order, land and police, the L-G must act on the aid and advise of the council of ministers of Delhi and not act as an obstructionist.
The 2021 amendment practically reversed the position taken by the SC as, under the amended law, the “government” in Delhi was to mean the L-G in the context of all legislation. The amendment emasculated the Delhi Assembly as well as the elected government as it made mandatory for the Delhi government to seek the opinion of the L-G before any executive action. The amendment also made the L-G’s approval necessary for legislative affairs that concern the day-to-day governance of Delhi.
AAP’s conciliatory approach
The Delhi government had threatened to move the apex court against the amended law. However, despite the initial rounds of protest, the AAP’s response against the GNCTD (Amendment) Act has been extremely muted. Sisodia, while answering questions on AAP’s strategy after the passage of the law, said: “As an elected government, the AAP government’s focus is on ensuring that benefits of good governance and welfare measures reach each and every resident of Delhi. So on one part, we will make sure that we adopt strategies and engage with the Centre in a way that we do not fail the people of Delhi like they did.”
Interpreting Article 239 AA
Delhi’s status of being a Union Territory under Schedule 1 of the Constitution but christened the ‘National Capital Territory’ under Article 239 AA brought about by the 69th amendment to the Constitution. This Article stipulates that the UT of Delhi is to be administered by a L-G who works on aid and advise of the elected legislative Assembly.
Delhi vs Centre on control of administrative services
A constitution bench has now posted the matter on September 27 to fix a time for the hearing. A three-judge bench in May had referred to a constitution bench the limited question regarding the control over administrative services in the National Capital Territory. The bench had observed that the major contention relates to the interpretation of phrases ‘any such matter is applicable to UTs’ and subject to provisions of the constitution in Article 239 AA(3)(a).
