New Delhi [India], January 16 : The Delhi High Court has reserved its judgment on a petition seeking a special session of the Delhi Legislative Assembly to discuss reports from the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) ahead of the upcoming Assembly elections.
The petition, filed by Delhi Legislative Assembly Leader of Opposition Vijender Gupta and six other BJP MLAs, aims to ensure government accountability and transparency.
The bench of Justice Sachin Datta reserved its judgment on the petition following an extensive hearing of the arguments.
Senior Advocate Sudhir Nandrajog, representing the Assembly Speaker, argued that the court should not issue directions to the Speaker, questioning whether it would serve any meaningful purpose given that only 20 days remained in the current Assembly's term, making it impractical to follow the procedures outlined under the Rules.
Nandrajog also responded to the BJP MLAs' plea, asserting that it was not a case of fundamental rights violation and that courts generally intervene only in exceptional circumstances when such violations occur.
On the last date of the hearing Delhi High Court criticised the Delhi Government for its delay in addressing the CAG reports, stating, "The way you have dragged your feet raises doubts about your bona fides."
The court further emphasised, "You should have promptly forwarded the reports to the Speaker and initiated a discussion in the House."
The bench of Justice Sachin Datta questioned the Delhi Government's handling of the CAG reports, stating, "The timeline is clear; you've dragged your feet to prevent the session from happening."
Previously the Delhi Assembly Secretariat informed the Court that tabling the CAG reports on city administration in the Assembly would serve no useful purpose, given that its tenure ends in February. The submission was made in response to a petition by seven BJP MLAs regarding the issue of tabling the CAG reports in the Assembly.
Earlier, the Delhi High Court sought responses from the Delhi Government, the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, and other respondents regarding a petition filed by BJP MLAs. The petition called for the convening of a special session of the Assembly to present 14 CAG reports.
The Delhi Government informed the Court that all 14 reports had been sent to the Speaker.
Vijender Gupta, the counsel for the BJP MLAs, argued that as a member of the House, it was his right to receive and debate the reports. He urged the Court to direct the Speaker to convene a special session. However, the Court observed that it could not issue an immediate order to the Speaker and stated that both parties would need to be heard before a decision could be made.
The Delhi Government opposed the petition, labelling it as politically motivated and indicated its intention to file a counter-affidavit. Gupta's counsel countered that the issue was not political but rather about ensuring government accountability, stressing that the matter should be resolved before the election announcements.