Supreme Court can't dictate President to dissolve assembly: Centre

NEW DELHI: The Centre on Tuesday braved the Supreme Court's displeasure over the "delaying tactics" in taking a decision — either to install a popular government or dissolve the Delhi assembly — and stood firm that the court could not dictate to the President when to end central rule in Delhi and call for fresh elections.

The court's initial outburst at the Centre presenting a letter from the President to the Delhi lieutenant governor permitting him to explore the possibility of formation of a popular government despite the inability of political parties — BJP, Aam Aadmi Party and Congress — to do so was supported by AAP counsel Prashant Bhushan.

Bhushan said it was a ploy by the central government to rule Delhi by proxy despite the ground situation presenting a clear picture that there was no possibility of any party - BJP or AAP — forming a government given their strength, which fell short of the halfway mark of 36 MLAs. He alleged that it was only to encourage 'horse-trading', and the court should intervene to stop this possible malpractice.

When a bench of Chief Justice H L Dattu and Justices J Chelameswar, A K Sikri, R K Agrawal and Arun Mishra expressed displeasure over the delaying tactics, additional solicitor general P S Narasimha stood firm in his argument that the Centre was following the Supreme Court's celebrated judgment in S R Bommai case, which mandated the President to explore every possible option for installing a popular government.

He said the constitutional process of exploring the possibility of forming a popular government was on and no timeframe could be set by the judiciary. The Centre drew support from senior advocate K K Venugopal, who appeared for BJP and presented arguments purely based on law to counter AAP's politico-moral offerings.

Venugopal said the statute provided that the President could through a proclamation keep the Delhi assembly in suspended animation for a year when no party was in a position to form a government. "That period of one year is yet to elapse. Can the SC now say that the President should, without exploring the possibility of formation of a popular government, dissolve the assembly? If one year time is available to the President, can the court intervene prior to elapse of one year," he asked.