Delhi High Court Criticizes AAP Government Over Delay in Handling CAG Reports

BJP lawyer Vijender Gupta argued that as a member of the House, he had the right to receive and debate the reports. He urged the court to direct the Speaker to call a special session, while the Delhi government opposed the petition, labeling it politically motivated. The court stated it could not make an immediate ruling, as both parties needed to be heard before a final decision. Gupta maintained that the issue was about government accountability, urging that it be resolved before election announcements.

Breaking News

The Delhi High Court has sharply criticized the AAP-led government for mishandling the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) reports, accusing them of delaying the process and raising doubts about their sincerity. A single-judge bench, led by Justice Sachin Datta, expressed concerns over the government’s actions, stating, “The way you have dragged your feet raises doubts about your bona fides.” The court further noted that the government should have promptly forwarded the reports to the Speaker and initiated discussions in the assembly.

The controversy centers around the Delhi government’s reluctance to table 14 CAG reports related to city administration before the Delhi Assembly, despite requests from BJP MLAs. Justice Datta also pointed out that the government had delayed the assembly session to prevent a timely discussion on the reports.

In response, the AAP government questioned the feasibility of holding sessions with upcoming elections in mind. The Delhi Assembly Secretariat had earlier informed the court that tabling the reports wouldn’t serve any purpose since the assembly’s term would end in February.

At a previous hearing, the court had asked the Delhi government, the Speaker, and other relevant parties to respond to a petition filed by seven BJP MLAs, requesting a special session to present the CAG reports. The Delhi government had stated that all 14 reports had already been sent to the Speaker.

BJP lawyer Vijender Gupta argued that as a member of the House, he had the right to receive and debate the reports. He urged the court to direct the Speaker to call a special session, while the Delhi government opposed the petition, labeling it politically motivated. The court stated it could not make an immediate ruling, as both parties needed to be heard before a final decision. Gupta maintained that the issue was about government accountability, urging that it be resolved before election announcements.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Latest News

Popular Videos

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -spot_img