In a bid to end the impasse between the Delhi government and Lieutenant Governor (L-G) over the appointment of the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC) chairman, the Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, Justices P S Narasimha and Manoj Misra has decided to take matters into its own hands. The DERC has remained without a head for an extended period, prompting the apex court to intervene.
During a hearing presided over by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, the court expressed its intention to appoint a pro-tem chairperson for the DERC. The appointment would be on an ad-hoc basis, temporarily fulfilling the responsibilities until a final resolution is reached.
The court highlighted its willingness to consult with possible candidates, preferably former High Court judges, to select the pro-tem chairperson. However, the court emphasized that the appointed individual would not serve for an extended term, but only until pending matters are disposed of.
The discord between the Delhi government and the L-G has led to a deadlock in the appointment of the DERC chairperson. Despite previous suggestions from the Supreme Court to resolve their differences amicably and propose a consensus candidate, no agreement has been reached.
The situation escalated when the L-G chose a candidate for the position, leading the Delhi government to challenge the appointment in the Supreme Court. The swearing-in of the candidate was subsequently deferred on the court's intervention.
While the court expressed its readiness to appoint a pro-tem chairperson, it refrained from accepting any lists of candidates from either side. Instead, the court decided to exercise its judgment and select an individual to oversee the DERC temporarily.
The case has been listed for further hearing on August 4, where the Supreme Court is expected to announce the appointed pro tem chairperson. Until then, the DERC will continue to function without a permanent head, leaving the court to intervene and ensure smooth operations in the interest of the public.
The court's decision to appoint a pro-tem chairperson marks an interim measure to address the vacancy, as the broader issues surrounding the appointment process and the validity of the Delhi Ordinance remain subjects of ongoing constitutional interpretation.
Source: Link
Picture Source :
