SC allows Delhi govt to withdraw plea concerning appointments in DERC
New Delhi, Aug 19 (PTI) The Supreme Court has allowed the Delhi government to withdraw its plea concerning the appointment of chairperson and members of the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission (DERC).
A bench comprising Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria passed the order on Monday.
'Counsel for the petitioner (Delhi government) has filed an application seeking withdrawal of this writ petition. Hence, the application for withdrawal is allowed. Consequently, the writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn," the bench said.
The counsel appearing for the Delhi government told the bench that until regular appointments are made in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law, the services of all the existing pro tem members shall continue.
The lawyer also assured the bench that the process of regular appointments shall be completed expeditiously.
While hearing the matter in November 2023, the top court had set up a three-member selection panel to make recommendations for the appointment of two pro tem members of the DERC.
The plea was filed in the apex court by the erstwhile AAP-led Delhi government in 2023. PTI ABA ABA KSS KSS
(This story has not been edited by News18 staff and is published from a syndicated news agency feed - PTI) view comments
First Published:
August 19, 2025, 23:00 IST
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Loading comments...
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
36 minutes ago
- Time of India
Whether President would seek SC opinion is her prerogative, says CJI
Supreme Court NEW DELHI: The Centre did not have to labour to persuade a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court on Thursday to recognise an apparent constitutional fallacy in the two-judge bench's April 8 virtual directive to the President to seek SC's opinion on constitutional validity of a bill reserved for her consideration by a governor. The constitution bench of CJI B R Gavai and Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, P S Narasimha and A S Chandurkar appeared convinced by solicitor general Tushar Mehta's argument that the two-judge bench could not have used SC's Article 142 powers to step into the governor's shoes and grant deemed assent to 10 bills of Tamil Nadu. "These two directions - the President to seek opinion of SC and deemed assent - are fundamentally flawed and unconstitutional," Mehta said. SC fallaciously assumed that the President, the highest constitutional authority of India, lacks ability or wherewithal to ascertain constitutional validity of bills, which have been passed by an assembly but reserved for her consideration by the governor, he argued. CJI Gavai responded to his argument about such directions being hazardous for the stone-carved constitutional doctrine of separation of powers by saying, "If all the bills reserved for the President's consideration become part of Presidential Reference, SC will do no other judicial work except giving advisory opinions as each Reference has to be addressed by a bench of minimum five judges." by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Telematics Will Shift Tech Into High Gear: 7 Projected Changes Over the Next 10 Years TechBullion Undo A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan had on Apr 9 said whenever a bill is reserved for the President's consideration on the ground of its patent unconstitutionality, "the President must be guided by the fact that it is the constitutional courts which have been entrusted with the responsibility of adjudicating upon the questions of constitutionality and legality of an executive or legislative action. Therefore, as a measure of prudence, the President ought to make a reference to this court in exercise of powers under Article 143 of the Constitution (and seek SC's opinion)". Mehta told the bench to take example of a case where the President obtains such opinion from SC on the constitutional validity of a bill and grants assent. With bill thus becoming an Act, as in the case of the Tamil Nadu bills which have been published in the gazette mentioning that SC has granted deemed assent, how would an HC or SC adjudicate its validity given the fact that it has become a law after the SC had already vetted its constitutionally validity? Steering clear of the maze of consequential constitutional complications that would emerge if SC engaged in pre-law stage vetting of validity of bills, the CJI said, "Whether the President would seek advisory opinion of SC under Article 143 is her sole prerogative." Mehta said Article 142 powers, exclusively given to SC to do complete justice by acting within the constitutional and statutory parameters, cannot be used to assume the role of another coordinate constitutional authority like governor. He said the Constitution wherever needed has provided the 'deemed' provision, and hence, it prohibits SC from reading in 'deemed assent' provision into the Constitution using the powers it enjoys under Article 142. On the President's last question - whether states could invoke Article 32 right to directly move SC seeking a mandamus to governor, Mehta said any federal dispute involving Centre and state(s); or state(s) and state(s), must be resolved politically or in the alternative, a suit under Article 131 can be filed in SC. However, he said he would take instructions from the President, whether she would still press for an opinion from SC on this issue and inform the bench on Tuesday.
News18
37 minutes ago
- News18
Trump Pick Alina Habba Serving Illegally As US Attorney, Says Federal Judge
Last Updated: Judge Brann further noted that Habba's appointment had occurred 'through a novel series of legal and personnel moves.' Alina Habba, currently serving as the acting US Attorney for New Jersey, has been disqualified from continuing her role in any active criminal cases initiated by her office. A federal judge issued the ruling on Thursday, stating that the former personal attorney for President Donald Trump has not been lawfully serving in an official legal capacity. 'Faced with the question of whether Ms. Habba is lawfully performing the functions and duties of the office of the United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey, I conclude that she is not," wrote Judge Matthew Brann of the Middle District of Pennsylvania in his opinion. Judge Brann further noted that Habba's appointment had occurred 'through a novel series of legal and personnel moves." His ruling may still be appealed by the Trump administration before it officially takes effect. The decision came in response to a legal challenge brought by criminal defendants in New Jersey. The group questioned the validity of the charges filed against them, arguing that Habba no longer held the authority to prosecute after the expiration of her 120-day term in July. Last month, in anticipation of the term's expiration, New Jersey's federal district judges had selected a new nominee to succeed Habba as acting US Attorney. However, that appointment was blocked by US Attorney General Pam Bondi, who removed the judges' nominee from the office entirely. Habba was sworn in as acting US Attorney on March 28, shortly after serving as President Trump's personal legal counsel. In April, during a Fox News interview, she revealed her office had initiated an investigation into New Jersey's Democratic Governor Phil Murphy and Attorney General Matthew Platkin. The following month, in May, she again appeared on Fox News to announce that criminal charges were being brought against Newark Mayor Ras Baraka. Her 120-day appointment officially concluded last month. To continue serving in the role beyond that term, Habba would require confirmation by the US Senate, something that has not occurred yet. The Justice Department, however, has defended her continued service, asserting that the president holds wide authority to fill such vacancies. 'The President has made clear that he will not permit anyone other than Ms Habba to fill the current vacancy in the office of the United States Attorney on a temporary basis," prosecutors wrote in a recent court filing. view comments First Published: August 22, 2025, 03:35 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Loading comments...
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Ludhiana: BJP leaders Ladhar, Kainth detained; let off after 4 hrs
High drama was witnessed after police detained former IAS officer and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader SR Ladhar and party's district rural president Sunny Kainth on data theft charges and detained them for over four hours on Thursday. The leaders were holding outreach camps to bring schemes of central government to the beneficiaries, when police turned up there and played spoilsport. BJP leaders staging a protest outside Dugri Police station in Ludhiana on Thursday. (Gurpreet Singh/HT) While Ladhar was detained at police post Raghunath Enclave along with his son Gautam and his security personnel, Sunny Kainth was detained at Dugri Police Station. After the police action, the BJP leaders-led by district president (urban) Rajnish Dhiman-staged a protest. They announced that the protest will be continued till the release of the leaders. Dhiman alleged that the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has failed to deliver any promise to the people which they made before assembly elections. He also added that the AAP-led state government is not implementing the schemes of the central government following which a number of people are deprived of the benefits. When they are bringing the schemes to the beneficiary the AAP government is harassing them, he alleged. Dhiman stated that Kainth was at his office and asking the people to take benefits of the outreach camp held in Tharike village. Further, he added that former Delhi chief minister Manish Sisodia had already revealed the intentions of AAP in a recent meeting in which he asked the workers to follow 'Sam dam dand bhed' policy. SR Ladhar, who is incharge of the camps, said that when he was about to reach the camp, the police detained him. Ladhar said that on being asked about the charges, the police officials stated that they have orders to deter the BJP leaders from holding the camps. By 3pm, the police let them go. The BJP leader stated that they are not afraid of such actions and camps will be continued in future as there is nothing illegal in it. He also added that the people are praising his party as the benefits are reaching to them at their doorsteps so the AAP government is deterring them. Commissioner of police Swapan Sharma stated that there were some reports of data theft at the camps. The police have detained some of the leaders and later they were released after verification. He said that investigation in the matter is on.
