AAP Vs L-G: Arvind Kejriwal Says Supreme Court Judgment Against Constitution, BJP Welcomes Verdict
Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal (Photo Credits: IANS)

New Delhi, February 14: Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal on Thursday expressed displeasure over the Supreme Court's split verdict on the contentious issue of control of services in the National Capital Territory, while the Bharatiya Janata Party welcomed the judgment. Addressing a press conference after the apex judgment, Arvind Kejriwal said the verdict is against 'Constitution and democracy'.

“The judgment is against constitution and democracy. We will seek legal remedies,” Kejriwal said, adding it was “injustice to the people” of Delhi. The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) chief also accused Prime Minister Narendra Modi led government of creating hurdles in the functioning of the Delhi government. The AAP said the judgment was more 'unfortunate' for the people of Delhi than it is for the Delhi government. AAP Vs L-G: From ACB to Electricity Department, Who Controls What in Delhi According to Supreme Court Judgment.

"How will a government, which does not even have the power to control which officer will do what, will run an entire state?" AAP spokesperson Saurabh Bhardwaj told the media. "The Delhi government completed four years today. Since it was formed, the Centre has been creating hurdles in the works of Delhi government. We were hoping that after four years, the SC will give a clear decision in the case," he said.

The BJP, on the other hand, welcomed the Supreme Court judgement and said it removes ambiguities in the powers of the Delhi government. There should no scope for “confusion or conflict” and the AAP government should humbly accept the Supreme Court judgement, Leader of Opposition in the Delhi Assembly Vijender Gupta said.

Earlier today, a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court delivered a split verdict on the issue of transfer and posting of Delhi government officers. The bench comprising Justices A K Sikri and Ashok Bhushan, however, agreed on their views on disputes pertaining to the Anti-Corruption Branch, setting up of a commission of inquiry, control over electricity boards, land revenue matters and appointment of public prosecutors.