Delhi vs Centre: the question is who has control over the bureaucrats

In July 2018 Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court advised the Centre, acting through the Lieutenant-Governor, and the Delhi government led by Chief Minister to follow the path of “collaborative federalism”.

“In collaborative federalism, the Union and the State Governments should express their readiness to achieve the common objective and work together for achieving it,” observed the Constitution Bench.

This Judgment had declared that the Delhi government had exclusive executive powers, except under Entries 1 (public order), 2 (police) and 18 (land) of the State List. It had cautioned the L-G to only intervene in matters “fundamental” to Delhi which could be escalated to the President.

Timeline of the Dispute

• 2017 Judgement:
  • The Delhi High Court had, in its judgment 2017 held that for administration purposes of the National Capital Territory (NCT), the Lieutenant Governor (L-G) is not bound by the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers in every matter.
  • On appeal, the SC in 2017, referred the matter to decide the interpretation of Article 239AA of the Constitution.
• 2018 Judgement:
  • A five-judge Constitution bench had unanimously held that the L-G of Delhi is bound by the aid and advice of the elected government, and both needed to work harmoniously with each other.
• 2019 Judgement:
  • A two-judge Bench of the SC delivered a split verdict on the question of powers of the Government of NCT of Delhi and Union government over services and referred the matter to a three-judge Bench.
    • While one judge had ruled the Delhi government has no power at all over administrative services.
    • Another judge, however, had said the transfer or posting of officers in top echelons of the bureaucracy (joint director and above) can only be done by the Central government and the view of the L-G would prevail in case of a difference of opinion for matters relating to other bureaucrats.
• 2022 Case:
  • The Centre on 27th April 2022 sought a reference to a larger Bench, arguing that it needed the power to make transfers and postings of officers in Delhi on account of it being the national capital and the “face of nation”.
  • The court agreed that the limited question relating to the scope of the legislative and executive powers of the Centre and NCT of Delhi, with respect to the term “services”, would need an authoritative pronouncement by a Constitution Bench in terms of Article 145(3) of the Constitution.
• Arguments For:
  • The Centre has consistently maintained that because Delhi is the national capital and the face of the country, it must have control over administrative services, which include appointments and transfers.
• Counter-Arguments:
  • The Delhi government has argued that in the interest of federalism, the elected representatives must have power over transfers and postings.
  • The Delhi government had also contended that the recent amendments to the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Act, 2021, violate the doctrine of basic structure of the Constitution.

Governance Model of New Delhi

• The status of Delhi being a Union Territory under Schedule 1 of the Constitution but christened the ‘National Capital Territory’ under Article 239AA.
• The 69th amendment to the Constitution of India inserted Article 239AA, which declared the Union Territory of Delhi to be administered by a L-G who works on aid and advice of the elected legislative assembly.
  • However, the ‘aid and advice’ clause pertains only to matters on which the elected Assembly has powers under the State and Concurrent Lists with the exception of public order, police, and land.
• Further, the Article 239AA also notes that L-G has to either act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, or he is bound to implement the decision taken by the President on a reference being made by him.
• Also, Article 239AA, empowers the L-G to refer a difference of opinion on ‘any matter’ with the Council of Ministers to the President.
• Thus, this dual control between L-G and the elected government leads to a power tussle.

Santiniketan may be added to World Heritage List

• Santiniketan, associated with Nobel laureate Rabindranath Tagore, has been recommended for inclusion on UNESCO’s World Heritage List
• The quaint town in West Bengal’s Birbhum district is also home to the Visva-Bharati University built by Tagore.
• The recommendation was made by the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), which is the advisory body to the UNESCO World Heritage Centre, based on a file moved by the Centre.
• Santiniketan, if selected, would be the second cultural symbol from West Bengal, to make it to the UNESCO list.
• In 2021, UNESCO had included ‘Durga Puja in Kolkata’ on its list of Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity.

Visva-Bharati University

• It is located in Shantiniketan, West Bengal, India. When founded in 1921, it was named after Nobel Laureate Rabindranath Tagore until Visva-Bharati Society was registered as an organization in May 1922.
  • Rabindranath believed in open-air education and introduced that system at the university, which prevails to date.
• According to UNESCO, in 1922, Visva-Bharati was inaugurated as a Centre for Culture with exploration into the arts, language, humanities, music and these are reflected in diverse institutes that continue in their educational programmes like including Hindi studies, Sino-Asian studies, humanities, fine arts, and music.
  • They are based on the founding principles of excellence in culture and culture studies.
• Until Independence, it was a college and the institution was given the status of Central University in 1951 through a Central Act.
• The structures within the institutes of Visva-Bharati University are diverse in architectural expression.
  • Examples include the
    • Kalo Bari (a mud structure with coal tar finish and sculpture panels)
    • Mastermoshai studio (a single-story structure built for the first principal of Kala Bhavan, Nandalal Bose)
    • Murals and paintings on Cheena and Hindi Bhavan

Study on sludge finds high potential for use as fertilizer after treatment

• Sludge found in Indian sewage treatment plants (STP), set up to treat polluted water from the Ganga, found that most of it had “high potential” for use as fertilizer, but required treatment before it could be used unrestricted on farms or as a potential biofuel.
• One of the measures under this, “Arth Ganga” (economic value from Ganga), is to “monetise” and reuse treated wastewater and sludge. This means converting sludge — a thick residue that while rich in organic chemicals is also a repository of heavy metals, industrial effluents and bacterial contaminants — into usable products such as manure and bricks.
• Treated sludge can be classified as class A or B —
• class A being safe to be disposed of in the open and useful as organic fertilizer.
• Class B means that the sludge can be used in “restricted” agricultural applications, the edible parts of the crop not be exposed to the sludge-mixed soil, and animals and people not come into extensive contact.
• India does not yet have standards classifying sludge as class A or B.
• A study found that most of the sludge analysed after drying fell into the class B category. Nitrogen and phosphorous levels — the basic soil nutrients — were higher than those recommended by India’s fertilizer standards (FCO, 2009).
• However, potassium levels in some samples were less than recommended. The total organic carbon was more than 16%, again higher than FCO recommendations, but the degree of pathogens as well as heavy metal contamination was above the recommended standard.
• when we have data about the chemical characteristics of the sludge can we then ask developers to adopt practices on treatment and safe disposal of sludge.

ICMR conducts trial run of blood bag delivery by drone

The Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) successfully conducted a trial run of delivery of blood bags under its iDrone initiative.

The inaugural trial flight carried 10 units of whole blood samples from the GIMS and the LHMC in visual line of sight.

The i-DRONE was first used during the COVID-19 pandemic by the ICMR for distributing vaccines to remote areas. Today, we are transporting blood and blood-related products which are supposed to be kept at a low temperature.

After the experiment, they found that not only can we maintain the temperature, there was also no damage to the products transported.

More drone flights will be conducted to validate the quality of blood products transported.

• Significance:
  • It will help in overcoming the gaps in current vaccine delivery mechanisms and can be used in delivering important life-saving medicines, collecting blood samples etc.
  • This technology can also be used in critical situations. It can be a game changer in addressing the challenges in health care delivery, particularly health supplies in difficult areas.
• Other Projects Using Drones:
  • Telangana government has selected 16 Primary Healthcare Centres (PHCs) for pilot testing the ambitious ‘Medicine from the sky’, the first-of- its-kind project.
  • The International Crops Research Institute (ICRISAT) was permitted to deploy drones for agricultural research activities, apart from some agriculture universities and educational institutions.