Holding

The Union Government may appoint the Chief Secretary after the GNCTD’s proposal and may extend the incumbent’s tenure for six months, and the writ petition is dismissed.

Summary

The Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) filed a writ petition fearing that the Union Government would unilaterally appoint the Chief Secretary of the Territory and extend his tenure without the GNCTD’s consent. The petition sought a restraining order and the appointment of a senior AGMUT officer. The Court examined Article 239AA, Entry 41 of the State List, the 2023 Constitution Bench judgment on services, the Transaction of Business Rules, and the 2023 Amendment to the GNCTD Act. It held that the GNCTD can only propose a candidate for Chief Secretary, the Lieutenant Governor must refer the proposal to the Central Government, and the Central Government’s decision is final, including the power to extend the incumbent’s service for six months. Consequently, the petition was dismissed and the writ disposed.

Issues considered

Whether the Union Government has unilateral power to appoint the Chief Secretary of the National Capital Territory of Delhi.
Whether the Union Government can extend the service of the incumbent Chief Secretary of the National Capital Territory of Delhi.

Legislation cited

All India Services (Death-cum-Retirement Benefits) Rules, 1958s. Rule 16
Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Act, 1991s. 41, s. 45A(d), s. 45H(2)
Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Act, 2023s. 3A
Indian Administrative Service (Cadre) Rules, 1954
Transaction of Business Rules, 1993s. Rule 55(2)(b), s. Rule 56

Subjects

Chief Secretary appointmentUnion Territory administrationArticle 239AAEntry 41 servicesTransaction of Business Rulesextension of servicejoint cadrecentral government powerlegislative competenceexecutive powerconstitutional law

Judgment

[2023] 16 S.C.R. 457 : 2023 INSC 1049

CASE DETAILS

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI
v.
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1268 of 2023)
NOVEMBER 29, 2023
[DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, CJI,
J.B. PARDIWALA AND MANOJ MISRA, JJ.]
HEADNOTES
Issue for consideration: Whether the Union Government has the
unilateral power to appoint the Chief Secretary of NCTD and; whether the
Union Government has the power to extend the service of the incumbent
Chief Secretary.
Constitution of India – Article 239AA(3)(a); VIIth Schedule,
State List, Entry 41 – Government of National Capital Territory of
Delhi Act 1991 as amended by the Government of National Capital
Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Act 2023 – Writ petition ﬁled by
Government of NCTD stating that they have reason to believe that
the Union of India will unilaterally appoint the Chief Secretary in the
exercise of the power u/s. 41 r/w s.45A(d) r/w s.45H(2), 1991 Act as
amended by the 2023 (Amendment) Act – 2023 Constitution Bench
judgment (Govt. of NCT of Delhi vs. Union of India) had dealt with
control over “services” pertaining to the National Capital Territory of
Delhi – Constitutional validity of the provisions of the 2023 Amendment
Act pending adjudication before the Constitution Bench, no stay on the
operation of the amendment Act – Prima facie view taken:
Held: Though the Government of NCTD is the appointing authority
for all posts in NCTD in terms of the 1954 Rules, the Transaction of
Business Rules places the appointments to the posts of Chief Secretary
and Commissioners of Police, Secretary (Home) and Secretary (Lands)
outside the competence of the GNCTD – Unlike other States, the GNCTD
only has the power to propose a candidate for the appointment as the

457
458 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 16 S.C.R.

Chief Secretary – The Lieutenant Governor is bound to refer the proposal
to the Central Government and the decision of the Central Government
on the proposal is ﬁnal – There can be no dispute about the basic position
that the Chief Secretary, as the head of the administration, exercises
jurisdiction of an administrative nature over the entirety of subjects
which fall within the domain of the executive functions of GNCTD
which would include those subjects (Entries 1, 2 and 18 of List II)
over which the Legislative Assembly and the State Government do not
have jurisdiction – Once it emerges that the Chief Secretary performs
important functions, among other things, in relation to the excluded
subjects as well, it would be farfetched to postulate that the Central
Government is divested of the power to appoint the Chief Secretary –
Further, r.16 of the 1958 Rules is a general rule which is applicable to
members of the service holding the post of Chief Secretary across all
States – The provision does not make a distinction between the Chief
Secretary serving in NCTD and the Chief Secretaries serving in other
States though the procedure for the appointment of the Chief Secretary
of NCTD is diﬀerent from the procedure for the appointment of Chief
Secretaries in other States in terms of the 1954 Rules read with the
Transaction of Business Rules – The position of the Chief Secretary of
the GNCTD is signiﬁcantly distinct in that the Chief Secretary performs
delegated executive functions which straddle both subjects which fall
within the executive and legislative competence of GNCTD as well as
those which lie outside – Consequently, the restrictions which operate
in relation to the grant of extension u/r.16 of the 1958 Rules in relation
to the Chief Secretary of one of the State Governments would not stricto
senso apply in relation to the GNCTD – At this stage, in view of the
principles enumerated in the judgment of this Court in 2023 Constitution
Bench judgment, and the subsequent developments which have taken
place resulting in the enactment of the amendment to the GNCTD Act
1991, the decision of the Union Government to extend the services
of the incumbent Chief Secretary for a period of six months cannot
be construed to be violative of law – Transaction of Business of the
Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Rules 1993 – r.55(2)
(b) – Indian Administrative Service (Cadre) Rules 1954 – All India
Services (Death-cum-Retirement Beneﬁts) Rules 1958 – Schedule to the
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI v. UNION OF INDIA 459
& ORS.

Indian Administrative Service (Fixation of Cadre Strength) Regulations
1955. [Paras 17, 24-26, 32, 33]
LIST OF CITATIONS AND OTHER REFERENCES
State (NCT of Delhi) Vs Union of India,(2018) 8 SCC 501: [2018]
7 SCR 1; Govt. of NCT of Delhi Vs Union of India, (2023) 9 SCC 1; E.P.
Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu & Anr., (1974) (4) SCC 3: [1974] 2 SCR
348 – referred to.
OTHER CASE DETAILS INCLUDING IMPUGNED
ORDER AND APPEARANCES
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition (Civil) No.1268
of 2023
(Under Article 32 of The Constitution of India)
Appearances:
Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Sr. Adv., Shadan Farasat, Amit Bhandari,
Aman Sharma, Siddharth Seem, Harshit Anand, Aman Naqvi, Ms. Hrishika
Jain, Ms. Natasha Maheshwari, Ms. Mreganka Kukreja, Advs. for the
Petitioner.
Tushar Mehta, Solicitor General, Sanjay Jain, Sr. Adv., Kanu Agrawal,
Padmesh Mishra, Arkaj Kumar, Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advs. for the
Respondents.
JUDGMENT / ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT

JUDGMENT

DR DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, CJI
1. The incumbent Chief Secretary of the Government of the National
Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) is due to demit oﬃce on superannuation
on 30 November 2023. The petitioner approached this court on the ground
that they have reason to believe that the Union of India will unilaterally
appoint the Chief Secretary in the exercise of the power under Sections 41
read with 45A(d) read with 45H(2) of the Government of National Capital
460 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 16 S.C.R.

Territory of Delhi Act 19911 as amended by the Government of National
Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Act 20232. The petitioner initiated
proceedings under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking:
a. A direction restraining respondents from making a unilateral
appointment of the Chief Secretary of the GNCTD or extending
the tenure of the incumbent Chief Secretary; and
b. An order appointing one of the ﬁve senior most oﬃcers serving
in the AGMUT cadre with the requisite experience of having
served in the GNCTD.
The Solicitor General has apprised the Court that the Union
Government proposes to grant an extension of six months to the incumbent.
2. Article 239AA(3)(a) of the Constitution stipulates that the
Legislative Assembly shall have power to make laws with respect to any
matter in the State List or Concurrent List insofar as any such matter
is applicable to Union Territories except for certain excluded matters.
Among the excluded matters are Entries 1, 2 and 18 of the State List and
Entries 64, 65 and 66 of the State List insofar as they relate to Entries
1, 2 and 18. Consequently, the subjects of (i) Public order (Entry 1);
(ii) Police (Entry 2); and (iii) Land (Entry 18) lie outside the legislative
domain of the Legislative Assembly. The division of legislative power
between NCTD and the Union of India as stipulated in Article 238-AA(3)
is summarized below:
a. The Legislative Assembly of NCTD has the competence to enact
laws for the whole or any part of NCTD in respect of matters
enumerated in the State List or Concurrent List insofar as such
matters are applicable to Union territories except matters with
respect to Entries 1,2, and 18 of the State List and Entries 64,65,
and 66 of the State List insofar as they relate to Entries 1 (public
order), 2 (police), and 18 (land) of the List3;

1 “GNCTD Act 1991”
2 “2023 Amendment Act”
3 Article 239-AA(3)(a)
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI v. UNION OF INDIA 461
& ORS. [DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, CJI]

b. Parliament shall have the power to enact laws for NCTD with
respect to all entries in the State List and Concurrent List4;
c. If any provision of a law made by the Legislative Assembly of
NCTD is repugnant to a provision of a law made by Parliament,
the law made by Parliament shall prevail.5
3. Two Constitution Benches of this Court have dealt with the
constitutional status imparted to the National Capital Territory by virtue of
the provisions of Article 239AA of the Constitution. These are:
(i) State (NCT of Delhi) Vs Union of India6
(ii) Govt. of NCT of Delhi Vs Union of India7
4. The second decision of the Constitution Bench (2023 Constitution
Bench judgment) specifically dealt with control over “services”
pertaining to the National Capital Territory of Delhi (NCTD). The subject
of services is comprised in Entry 41 of the State List to the Seventh
Schedule (“State Public Services; State Public Services Commission”).
The 2023 Constitution Bench judgment held that Article 239-AA(3)(a)
does not exclude the legislative power of NCTD over entries other than
those expressly excluded in the provision, and thus, NCTD has legislative
competence over “services”. Since executive power is co-extensive
with legislative power, this Court held that NCTD will have executive
power over “services”. An incidental issue that arose was with respect
to the scope of the executive power over entries over which both the
Union of India and NCTD have legislative competence. Drawing upon
the principles in Articles 73 and 162, the 2023 Constitution Bench held
that on entries over which Parliament also has legislative competence,
the executive power shall ordinarily lie with NCTD. However, such
executive power would be “subject to and limited by” the executive
power expressly conferred upon the Union of India by provisions of the

4 Article 239-AA(3)(b)
5 Article 239-AA(3)(c)
6 (2018) 8 SCC 501-
7 (2023) 9 SCC 1 – “2023 Constitution Bench”
462 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 16 S.C.R.

Constitution or a law made by Parliament.8 The relevant observation is
extracted below:
“85. […] The executive power of NCTD shall extend to all entries in
List II and List III, other than the entries expressly excluded in Article
239AA(3). Such power shall be subject to the executive power of the
Union (through the Lieutenant Governor) only when the Union has
been granted such power by the Constitution or a law of Parliament.
Therefore, the executive power of NCTD, in the absence of a law
by Parliament, shall extend to all subjects on which it has power to
legislate.”
[…]
“95. […] The executive power of the Union, in the absence of a law
upon its executive power relating to any subject in the State List, shall
cover only matters relating to the three entries which are excluded
from the legislative domain of NCTD. As a corollary, in the absence
of a law or provision of the Constitution, the executive power of the
Lieutenant Governor acting on behalf of the Union Government shall
extend only to matters related to the three entries mentioned in Article
239-AA(3)(a), subject to the limitations in Article 73. Furthermore,
if the Lieutenant Governor diﬀers with the Council of Ministers of
GNCTD, he shall act in accordance with the procedure laid down in
the Transaction of Business Rules. However, if Parliament enacts
a law granting executive power on any subject which is within the
domain of NCTD, the executive power of the Lieutenant Governor
shall be modiﬁed to the extent, as provided in that law. Furthermore,
under Section 49 of the GNCTD Act, the Lieutenant Governor and
the Council of Ministers must comply with the particular directions
issued by the President on speciﬁc occasions.”

8 The proviso to Article 73 states that the Union of India shall not have executive power
on matters over which the State can also enact on unless such power is expressly
granted by the Constitution or law of Parliament. The proviso to Article 162 states
that on matters over which both the state legislature and Parliament can make laws,
the executive power of States shall be subject to and limited by the executive power
expressly conferred upon Union of India by a law of Parliament or by the Constitution.
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI v. UNION OF INDIA 463
& ORS. [DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, CJI]

The Court held that NCTD has legislative and executive power with
respect to services under Entry 41. Since, however, the subjects of Public
order, Police and Land are excluded from the domain of the Legislative
Assembly, this Court observed :
“160. […] The legislative and executive power of NCTD over Entry
41 shall not extend over to services related to “public order”, “police”
and “land”. However, legislative and executive power over services
such as Indian Administrative Services, or Joint Cadre services, which
are relevant for the implementation of policies and vision of NCTD in
terms of day-to-day administration of the region shall lie with NCTD.”
5. After the judgment of the 2023 Constitution Bench, the President in
the exercise of powers under Article 123 of the Constitution promulgated the
Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Ordinance
2023 by which a provision9 was included in the GNCTD Act 1991 excluding
the legislative competence of the NCTD over Entry 41 of the List II. By
an order dated 20 July 2023, this Court referred the issue on the contours
of the power of Parliament to enact a law under Article 239-AA(7) to a
Constitution Bench. By the said order, the application for the stay of the
2023 Ordinance was dismissed.
6. On 11 August 2023, Parliament enacted the 2023 Amendment Act.
The petitioners ﬁled an interlocutory application10 seeking an amendment
to the writ petition challenging the provisions of the 2023 Amendment Act.
The constitutional validity of the provisions of the 2023 Amendment Act is
pending adjudication before the Constitution Bench.
7. Rule 55(2)(b) of the Transaction of Business of the Government
of National Capital Territory of Delhi Rules 199311 requires the Lieutenant
Governor to refer a proposal to appoint the Chief Secretary to the Central
Government:
“(2) Subject to any instructions which may from time to time be issued
by the Central Government, the Lieutenant Governor shall make a

9 Section 3A of the 2023 Ordinance
10 IA No. 160111 of 2023 in WP (C) 678 of 2023
11 “Transaction of Business Rules”
464 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 16 S.C.R.

prior reference to the Central Government in the Ministry of Home
Aﬀairs or to the appropriate Ministry with a copy to the Ministry of
Home Aﬀairs in respect of the following matters:-
(a) Proposals aﬀecting the relations of the Central Government with
any State Government, the Supreme Court of India or any other High
Court;
(b) Proposals for the appointment of Chief Secretary and
Commissioner of Police, Secretary (Home) and Secretary (Lands);
(c) important cases which aﬀect or are likely to aﬀect the peace and
tranquility of the National Capital Territory; and
(d) cases which aﬀect or are likely to aﬀect the interests of any minority
community, Scheduled Castes or the backward classes.”
(emphasis supplied)
8. Section 41 which deals with matters on which the Lieutenant
Governor shall act in his sole discretion has been amended to include, in
clause (iii) of sub-section (1), the discharge of functions under Part IV-A of
the Act. Part IV-A has been introduced by way of an amendment. Section
45A(d) deﬁnes the Chief Secretary to mean “the Chief Secretary of the
Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi appointed by the Central
Government”. Clause (i) of Section 45A deﬁnes “Group A oﬃcers” in the
following terms :
“(i) “Group ‘A’ oﬃcers” means the oﬃcers serving in the aﬀairs of
the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi—
(a) belonging to All India Services, except the oﬃcers of the Indian
Police Service;
(b) who are classiﬁed as Group ‘A’ oﬃcers, under rule 4 of the Central
Civil Services (Classiﬁcation, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965,
but shall not include the oﬃcers who are serving in connection with any
subject matter, whether fully or in part connected with Entries 1, 2 and
18 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution, and Entries
64, 65 and 66 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI v. UNION OF INDIA 465
& ORS. [DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, CJI]

insofar as they relate to Entries 1, 2 and 18 or any other subject matter
which is connected therewith or incidental thereto:
(emphasis supplied)
9. Among other amendments, Section 45E provides for the constitution
of the National Capital Civil Service Authority. In terms of sub-Section (2) of
Section 45E, the Authority shall consist of the Chief Minister of NCTD, the
Chief Secretary of GNCTD, and the Principal Home Secretary of GNCTD.
Section 45H deﬁnes the powers and functions of the authority. Sub-section
(1) of Section 45H provides as follows:
“45-H.(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the
time being in force, the Authority shall have the responsibility to
recommend the transfers and postings of all Group ‘A’ oﬃcers and
oﬃcers of DANICS serving in the aﬀairs of the Government of National
Capital Territory of Delhi but not oﬃcers serving in connection with
any subject matter, either fully or in part, connected with Entries
1, 2 and 18 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution;
and Entries 64, 65 and 66 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the
Constitution insofar as they relate to Entries 1, 2 and 18 or any other
subject matter which is connected therewith or incidental thereto, to
the Lieutenant Governor:
Provided that Authority may, if it deems appropriate, by way of a
recommendation, delegate the responsibility to any other authority of
the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi.”
(emphasis supplied)
10. Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi, senior counsel appearing on behalf
of the petitioners submits that:
a. The decision of this Court in E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil
Nadu & Anr12, dwelt with the importance of the post of Chief
Secretary in terms of its sensitivity, responsibility and the rapport
which is required between the Chief Secretary and the Chief
Minister;

12 (1974) (4) SCC 3
466 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 16 S.C.R.

b. The provisions of Section 45A(d) contain only a deﬁnition of
the expression “Chief Secretary” and cannot be construed to be
a substantive provision governing the appointment of the Chief
Secretary by the Central Government;
c. Section 45E of the amended statute which deals with the transfers
and postings of the Group A oﬃcers under the auspices of the
National Capital Civil Service Authority cannot encompass the
Chief Secretary who is a ex oﬃcio part of the authority;
d. The power under Rule 55(2)(b) of the Transaction of Business
Rules has always been exercised by the Lieutenant Governor on
the aid and advice of the NCTD Government;
e. In terms of the third proviso of Rule 16(1) of the All India Services
(Death-cum-Retirement Beneﬁts) Rules 195813, an extension
to a member of the All India Service holding the post of Chief
Secretary to a State Government can be granted for a period of
not more than six months “on the recommendations made by the
concerned State Government with full justiﬁcation and in public
interest with the prior approval of the Central Government”;
f. Reference to the State Government in the third proviso to Rule
16 of the AIS (DCRB) Rules 1958 can only mean the GNCTD
bearing in mind the observations in paragraph 173 of the
judgment in the 2023 Constitution Bench. Thus, in the absence
of its recommendation, which has to be backed by a justiﬁcation
and in public interest, no extension can be granted unilaterally
by the Central Government;
g. No extension has been granted to the Chief Secretary in GNCTD
even in a single instance over 30 years; and
h. Apart from the three expressly excluded entries of the State List
pertaining to Police, Public Order and Land, the Chief Secretary
also deals with 110 other entries of the Seventh Schedule in the
performance of his functions. That is why a recommendation for

13 “1958 Rules”
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI v. UNION OF INDIA 467
& ORS. [DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, CJI]

the appointment of the Chief Secretary has emanated from the
GNCTD while the appointment is actually made by the Union
Government. Hence, the proposed extension which is sought to
be granted to the Chief Secretary is without the authority of law.
11. In response to the plea which has been made by the petitioner,
an aﬃdavit has been ﬁled by the Joint Secretary (Union Territories) in the
Union Ministry of Home Aﬀairs. The aﬃdavit sets out that:
a. Extensions have been granted in the previous 12 months alone
to the Chief Secretaries in the States of West Bengal, Rajasthan,
Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, as set out in the table
extracted below :
Name of the State/Union Date of Periodof
Oﬃcer Serving as Territory superannuation Extension Granted
Chief Secretary

HK Dwivedi, West Bengal 30.06.2023 06 Months
IAS (from 01.07.2023
(WB:1988) to 31.12.2023)
Usha Sharma, Rajasthan 30.06.2023 06 Months
IAS (from 01.07.2023
(RR: 1985) to 31.12.2023)
Durga Shanker Uttar Pradesh 31.12.2021 01 year
Mishra, (from 01.01.2022
IAS (UP: 1984) to 31.12.2022)
01 year
(from 01.01.2023
to 31.12.2023)
Iqbal Singh Bains, Madhya 30.11.2022 06 Months
IAS (MP:1985) Pradesh (from 01.12.2022
to 31.05.2023)
06 months (from
01.06.2023 to
30.11.2023)

b. Senior IAS as well as IPS oﬃcers in the AGMUT cadre have been
granted extensions of tenure on superannuation on the following
occasions in the previous ten years:
468 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 16 S.C.R.

Name of the State/ Union Date of Period of
Oﬃcer Serving Territory superannuation Extension Granted
as Chief
Secretary
Shri Subhash Uttarakhand 30.04.2014 06 Months
Kumar, (from 01.05.2014
IAS (UK: 1977) to 31.10.2014)
Dr. Varesh Sinha, Gujarat 30.04.2014 03 Months
IAS (GJ: 1977) (from 01.05.2014
to 31.07.2014) 03
Months
(from01.08.2014
to 31.10.2014)
Shri Rinchen Sikkim 31.01.2015 03 Months
Ongmu, (from 01.02.2015 to
IAS (SK: 1977) 30.04.2015)
03 Months
(from 01.05.2015 to
31.07.2015)
Shri Shakuntala Haryana 30.09.2014 02 Months
Jakhu, (from 01.10.2014 to
IAS (HY: 1978) 30.11.2014)
Shri D.M.Spolia, Delhi 31.01.2015 01 month
IAS (AGMUT: (from 01.02.2015 to
1979) 28.02.2015)
Shri Kaushik Karnataka 30.09.2015 03 Months
Mukherjee, (from 01.10.201 5to
IAS (KN: 1978) 31.12.2015)
Shri C. C. Rajan, Rajasthan 31.12.2015 03 Months
IAS (RJ:1978) (from 01.01.2016 to
31.03.2016)
Shri Uttar Pradesh 31.03.2016 03 Months
Alok Ranjan, (from 01.04.2016 to
IAS(UP:1978) 30.06.2016)
Dr. Rajiv Sharma, Telangana 31.05.2016 03 Months
IAS (TG:1982) (from 01.06.2016 to
31.08.2016)
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI v. UNION OF INDIA 469
& ORS. [DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, CJI]

Shri Arvind Karnataka 30.06.2016 03 Months
Jadhav, IAS (KN: (from01.07.2016 to
1978) 30.09.2016)
Shri Rajesh Goa 30.06.2016 03 Months
Kumar (from 01.07.2016 to
Srivastava, IAS 30.09.2016)
(AGMUT: 1984)
03 Months
(from 01.10.2016 to
31.12.2016)
Shri S.P. Tucker, Andhra 31.12.2016 03 Months
IAS (AP:1981) Pradesh (from 01.01.2017 to
31.03.2017)
Shri Swadheen S Maharashtra 31.01.2017 03 Months
Kshatriya, IAS (from 01.02.2017 to
(MH: 1980) 30.04.2017)
Shri V.K. Madhya 31.08.2017 06 Months
Pipersenia, IAS Pradesh (from 01.09.2017 to
(MP: 1980) 31.03.2018)
Shri Rajani Manipur 30.09.2017 03 Months
Ranjan Rashmi, (from 01.10.2017 to
IAS (MN: 1983) 31.12.2017)
03 Months
(from 01.01.2018 to
31.03.2018)
Shri Bharat Jammu 30.11.2017 03 Months
Bhushan Vyas, & Kashmir (from 01.12.2017 to
IAS (JK/ 28.02.2018)
AGMUT: 1986) 03 Months
(from 01.03.2018 to
31.05.2018)
01Year
(from 01.06.2018 to
31.05.2019)
Shri Anjani Bihar 28.02.2018 03 Months
Kumar Singh, (from 01.03.2018 to
IAS (BH: 1981) 31.05.2018)
470 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 16 S.C.R.

Ms. Ratna Karnataka 31.03.2018 03 Months
Prabha, IAS (from 01.04.2018 to
(KN: 1981) 30.06.2018)
Shri Basant Madhya 30.06.2018 06 Months
Pratap Pradesh (from 01.07.2018 to
Singh,IAS 31.01.2019)
(MP:1984)
Shri Sudhir Jharkhand 30.09.2018 03 Months
Tripathi,IAS(JH: (from01.10.2018 to
1985) 31.12.2018)
03 Months
(from 01.01.2019 to
31.03.2019)
Shri Dinesh Maharashtra 31.01.2019 06 Months
Kumar Jain, (from 01.02.2019 to
IAS (MH: 1983) 31.07.2019)
Dr. Anup Uttar Pradesh 28.02.2019 06 Months
Chandra Pandey, (from 01.03.2019 to
IAS 31.08.2019)
(UP:1984)
Dr. J.N. Singh, Gujarat 31.05.2019 06 Months
IAS (GJ: 1983) (from 01.06.2019 to
30.11.2019)
Shri Ajoy Maharashtra 30.09.2019 06 Months
Mehta, IAS (from 01.10.2019to
(MH:1984) 31.03.2020)
06 Months
(from 01.04.2020 to
30.06.2020)

Shri Deepak Bihar 29.02.2020 06 Months
Kumar, (from 01.03.2020 to
IAS (BH: 1984) 31.08.2020)
06 Months
(from 01.09.2020 to
28.02.2021)
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI v. UNION OF INDIA 471
& ORS. [DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, CJI]

Shri Nilam Andhra 30.06.2020 03 Months
Sawhney, IAS Pradesh (from 01.07.2020 to
(AP: 1984) 30.09.2020)
03 Months
(from 01.10.2020 to
31.12.2020)
Shri T.K. 03 Months
Shanmugam,IAS Tamil Nadu 31.07.2020 (from 01.08.2020 to
(TN: 1985) 31.10.2020)
03 Months
(from 01.11.2020 to
31.01.2021)
Shri Anil Mukim, Gujarat 31.08.2020 06 Months
IAS (GJ:1985) (from 01.09.2020 to
28.02.2021)
06 Months
(from 01.03.2021 to
31.08.2021)
Shri Alapan WestBengal 31.05.2021 03 Months
Bandopadhyay, (from 01.06.2021 to
IAS(WB:1987) 31.08.2021)

Shri Tripurari Bihar 30.06.2021 03 Months
Sharan, (from 01.07.2021 to
IAS (BH: 1985) 30.09.2021)
03 Months
(from 01.10.2021
to 31.12.2021)
Shri Aditya Nath Andhra 30.06.2021 03 Months
Das, IAS (AP: Pradesh (from 01.07.2021 to
1987) 30.09.2021)
Dr. Sameer Andhra 30.11.2021 06 Months
Sharma, IAS( AP: Pradesh (from 01.12.2021 to
1985) 31.05.2022)
472 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 16 S.C.R.

06 Months
(from 01.06.2022 to
30.11.2022)
Shri Durga 01 Year
Shanker Misra, Uttar Pradesh 31.12.2021 (from 01.01.2022 to
IAS 31.12.2022)
(UP:1984)
01 Year
(from 01.01.2023 to
31.12.2023)

Shri Suresh 06 Months
Chandra Odisha 28.02.2022 (from 01.03.2022 to
Mahapatra, 31.08.2022)
IAS (OD: 1986)
06 Months
(from 01.09.2022
to 28.02.2023)
Dr. 06 Months
Rajesh Kumar, Manipur 30.06.2022 (from 01.07.2022 to
IAS (MN: 1988) 31.12.2022)
06 Months
(from01.01.2023 to
31.05.2023)
Shri Pankaj Gujarat 31.05.2022 08 Months
Kumar, (from 01.06.2022 to
IAS (GJ: 1986) 31.01.2023)

Shri Iqbal Singh 30.11.2022 06 Months
Bains, IAS (MP: Madhya (from 01.12.2022 to
1985) Pradesh 30.05.2023)
06 Months
(from 01.06.2023
to 30.11.2023)
Shri Hari West Bengal 30.06.2023 06 Months
Krishna (from 01.07.2023 to
Dwivedi,IAS 31.12.2023)
(WB: 1988)
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI v. UNION OF INDIA 473
& ORS. [DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, CJI]

Smt. Rajasthan 30.06.2023 06 Months
Usha Sharma, (from 01.07.2023 to
IAS (RJ: 1985) 31.12.2023)
Dr. Sukhbir Singh Uttarakhand 31.07.2023 06 Months
Sandhu, IAS (from 01.08.2013 to
(UD: 1988) 31.01.2024)

c. There are as many as 57 instances since 2013 where extensions
have been granted to superannuating Chief Secretaries which
have been tabulated in the aﬃdavit;
d. Section 45A, though a part of the deﬁnition provisions of the
amended Act, expressly recognises the power of appointment
of the Central Government of the Chief Secretary of the NCTD;
e. Though the power of granting an extension to a member of an All
India Service holding the post of Chief Secretary under Rule 16
of the 1958 Rules is to be exercised by the Central Government
on the recommendations of the State Government, in the case
of the NCTD, the relevant cadre deploying the oﬃcers is the
AGMUT cadre which is a Joint Cadre. Rule 2(1)(m) deﬁnes the
State Government in the case of a joint cadre to mean the Joint
Cadre Authority14; and
f. The Government of India Allocation of Business Rules 1961
provide, in relation to the Union Ministry of Home Aﬀairs, that
:
“(d) General Questions relating to public services in the Union
Territories and service matters in so far as these fall within
the purview of State Government relating to:
(i) the oﬃcers of Indian Administrative Service and
Indian Police Service serving in connection with the
aﬀairs of the Union Territories;

14 Rule 2(1)(m): State Government means the State Government on whose cadre the
member of the Service was borne immediately before retirement or death and in
relation to a member of an All India Service borne on a joint cadre, the joint cadre
Authority.
474 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 16 S.C.R.

(ii) NCT of Delhi, Andaman and Nicobar Islands,
Lakshdweep, Daman and Diu and Dadra and Nagar
haveli Civil and Police Services (DANICS and
DANIPS);
(iii) Pondicherry Civil and Police Services.”
12. The submissions which were urged by the Solicitor General have
been supplemented by Mr Sanjay Jain, senior counsel. Mr. Jain submitted
that:
a. The decision of this Court in the 2023 Constitution Bench makes
it clear that the executive role of the NCTD does not extend to
services related to public order, police and land keeping in view
that Entries 1, 2 and 18 stand excluded from the legislative power
of NCTD;
b. The Chief Secretary indivisibly performs functions relating to
Entries 1, 2 and 18;
c. Consequently, in the appointment of the Chief Secretary, as well
as in the appointment of the Secretary (Home), Secretary (Land)
and Commissioner of Police, the elected Government of NCTD
would not have any control;
d. After the insertion of Article 239AA, a proposal for the
appointment of oﬃcers to these four posts was invariably moved
by the Lieutenant Government to the Central Government in
the Ministry of Home Aﬀairs in terms of Rule 55(2)(b) of the
Transaction of Business Rules;
e. In terms of Rule 56, whenever a proposal is received under Rule
55(2)(b) from the Lieutenant Governor, the Central Government
would have to take the appropriate decision; and
f. Section 41 of the GNCTD Act deals with matters in which the
Lieutenant Governor may act in his sole discretion and even
prior to the amendment, it was permissible for him to act without
aid and advice in all matters falling outside the purview of the
Legislative Assembly, namely Entries 1, 2 and 18 of the State
List.
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI v. UNION OF INDIA 475
& ORS. [DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, CJI]

13. At this stage, it must be noted that the reference before the
Constitution bench is pending and there is no stay on the operation of the
amendment Act. Thus, only a prima facie view is formed on the merits of
the rival submissions.
14. In its decision in 2023 Constitution Bench, this Court held that :
a. The subject of ‘services’ falls within the ambit of the legislative
and executive competence of NCTD under Entry 41 of the State
List of the Seventh Schedule;
b. However, the legislative and executive power of NCTD over
Entry 41 does not extend over services related to the excluded
subjects of public order, police and land;
c. In the absence of a law conferring upon it executive power
relating to any subject in the State List, the executive power of
the Union Government covers only matters relating to the three
entries which are excluded from the legislative domain of NCTD;
d. If Parliament enacts a law granting executive power on any
subject which is within the domain of NCTD, the executive power
of the Lieutenant Governor shall be modiﬁed to that extent as
provided in the law;
e. The Lieutenant Governor is bound by the aid and advice of the
Council of Ministers of NCTD in relation to matters which fall
within the legislative domain of NCTD; and
f. NCTD has legislative power over services excluding public
order, police and land. Hence, the Lieutenant Governor is bound
by the decisions of GNCTD on services, save and except for the
excluded subjects and as modiﬁed by the law.
These principles have been culled out prima facie at this stage on an
analysis of the observations of the judgment in 2023 Constitution Bench.
15. Two issues fall for the consideration of this Court: ﬁrstly, whether
the Union Government has the unilateral power to appoint the Chief
Secretary of NCTD; and secondly, whether the Union Government has the
power to extend the service of the incumbent Chief Secretary.
476 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 16 S.C.R.

16. We will ﬁrst deal with the issue of whether the Union Government
has the unilateral power to appoint the Chief Secretary of NCTD. Rule 2(b)
of the Indian Administrative Service (Cadre) Rules 195415 deﬁnes Cadre post
as any of the posts speciﬁed under item 1 of each cadre in the Schedule to
the Indian Administrative Service (Fixation of Cadre Strength) Regulations
195516. The 1955 Regulations mention Chief Secretary as one of the cadre
posts. Rule 7 of the 1954 Rules states that all appointments to cadre posts
in a joint cadre shall be made by the State Government concerned. The
State Government is deﬁned in relation to a Joint cadre to mean the Joint
Cadre Authority. Rule 11A of the 1954 Rules states that the power of the
State Government , inter alia, under Rule 7 in relation to the members of
the Service serving in connection with the aﬀairs of any of the constituent
States shall be exercised by the Government of that State, and State is
deﬁned to include Union Territory17. The 2023 Constitution Bench judgment
interpreted the above provisions and held that the GNCTD has the power
to make appointments to cadre posts in NCTD:
“173. We shall take the example of the Indian Administrative Service
(Cadre) Rules, 1954, which deal with the posting of IAS Oﬃcers.
Rule 2(a) deﬁnes “cadre oﬃcer” to mean a member of IAS. Rule 2(b)
deﬁnes “Cadre post” as any post speciﬁed under Item I of each cadre in
the Schedule to the Indian Administrative Service (Fixation of Cadre
Strength) Regulations, 1955. Rule 2(c) deﬁnes “State” to mean a State
speciﬁed in the Schedule I to the Constitution and includes a Union
Territory. Rule 2(d) deﬁnes “State Government concerned”, in relation
to a Joint cadre, to mean the Joint Cadre Authority. The constitution
and composition of a “Joint Cadre Authority” is understood with
reference to the All-India Services (Joint Cadre) Rules, 1972. The
1972 Rules apply to a “Joint Cadre constituted for any group of States
other than the Joint Cadre of Union Territories”. Rule 3 of the IAS
(Cadre) Rules, 1954 provides for the constitution of cadres for each
State or group of States “as a “State Cadre” or, as the case may be, a
“Joint Cadre”. Rule 5 empowers the Central Government to allocate

15 “1954 Rules’
16 “1955 Regulations”
17 Rule 2(c) of the 1955 Regulations
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI v. UNION OF INDIA 477
& ORS. [DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, CJI]

cadre oﬃcers to various cadres. In terms of Rule 5(1), the allocation
of cadre oﬃcers to the various cadres shall be made by the Central
Government in consultation with the State Government or the State
Government concerned. Rule 7 stipulates that all appointments to cadre
posts shall be made “on the recommendation of the Civil Services
Board” — by the State Government “in the case of a State cadre”,
and by the State Government concerned, as deﬁned in Rule 2(d), “in
the case of a joint cadre”. Under Rule 11-A, the “Government of that
State” is provided with powers to take decisions under Rule 7 (and
other mentioned rules) in relation to the members of the Joint Cadre
Service “serving in connection with the aﬀairs of any of the Constituent
States”. A combined reading of Rules 2, 7 and 11-A indicates that
the postings within the State Cadre as well as Joint Cadre of a
Constituent State shall be made by the “Government of that State”,
that is, by the duly elected Government. In our case, it shall be the
Government of NCTD. We accordingly hold that references to “State
Government” in relevant Rules of All-India Services or Joint Cadre
Services, of which NCTD is a part or which are in relation to NCTD,
shall mean the Government of NCTD.”
(emphasis supplied)
17. However, the scope of Rule 55(2)(b) of the Transaction of Business
Rules must also be noticed. Rule 55(2)(b) requires the Lieutenant Governor,
subject to any instructions which may be issued by the Central Government,
to make a prior reference to the Central Government of proposals for the
appointment of Chief Secretary and Commissioner of Police, Secretary
(Home) and Secretary (Lands). Rule 56 provides that when a matter has
been referred by the Lieutenant Governor to the Central Government under
Rule 55, further action shall not be taken except in accordance with the
decision of the Central Government. Though the Government of NCTD is
the appointing authority for all posts in NCTD in terms of the 1954 Rules,
the Transaction of Business Rules places the appointments to the posts
of Chief Secretary and Commissioners of Police, Secretary (Home) and
Secretary (Lands) outside the competence of the GNCTD.
18. The reason for this provision would emerge from the three excluded
subjects of Entries 1, 2 and 18 of List 2 of the State List which fall outside
478 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 16 S.C.R.

the purview of the GNCTD. The excluded subjects being ‘Police’, ‘Public
order’ and ‘Land’, the Commissioner of Police and the Secretaries In-charge
of the Home and Land Departments are speciﬁcally brought within the
purview of those matters where the Lieutenant Governor has to make a prior
reference to the Union Government. The Chief Secretary has, in addition,
been brought within the purview of Rule 55(2)(d) for the reason that the
Chief Secretary of the GNCTD exercises overall supervision and control
over all the departments including the departments which are relatable to
the excluded subjects.
19. Signiﬁcantly, at this stage, it will be material to note that the
amendments which have been made to the GNCTD Act 1991 by the insertion
of Pat IV-A contain analogous provisions in clause (i) of Section 45A by
excluding oﬃcers who are serving in connection with any subject matter
whether fully or in part connected with Entries 1, 2 and 18 of List II (and
Entries 64, 65 and 66 insofar as they relate to Entries 1, 2 and 18) from
the ambit of the deﬁnition of Group A oﬃcers. Likewise, while deﬁning
the powers and functions of the National Capital Civil Service Authority
in Section 45H, oﬃcers who are serving in connection with any subject
matter, either fully or in part, connected with Entries 1, 2 and 18 of List 2
are excluded speciﬁcally.
20. The petitioners submit that the Lieutenant Governor has always
exercised the power under Rule 55(2) under the aid and advice of the Council
of Ministers. In terms of Article 239-AA(4), the Lieutenant Governor shall
exercise his functions with the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers in
relation to matters with respect to which the Legislative Assembly has the
power to make laws, except insofar as he is, by or under any law, required
to act in his discretion.
21. Section 41 of the GNCTD Act lists the matters on which the
Lieutenant Governor may act at his discretion. The provision states
that the Lieutenant Governor may act in his discretion: (a) on matters
which are beyond the powers of the Legislative Assembly and where
the President has delegated the powers and functions to the Lieutenant
Governor in relation to such matters; and (b) on matters which by law
require him to act in his discretion or where he is exercising judicial or
quasi-judicial functions.
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI v. UNION OF INDIA 479
& ORS. [DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, CJI]

22. The question of whether the Lieutenant Governor should act on the
aid and advice of the Council of Ministers while discharging the function
under Rule 55(2)(b) must be answered in light of the following position
of law:
a. The judgment of this Court in the 2023 Constitution Bench that
the legislative and executive power of NCTD shall extend to
services except services related to the excluded entries (that is,
public order, police, and land); and
b. The Lieutenant Governor is required to act on the aid and
advice of the Council of Ministers only on matters over which
the Legislative Assembly of NCTD has competence. Even with
respect to such matters, the Lieutenant Governor may act on
his discretion if the law provides so. [2023 Constitution Bench
judgment, Article 239-AA(4) of the Constitution and Section 41
of the GNCTD Act]
23. The Lieutenant Governor while exercising the power under Rule
55(2)(b) is required to act at their discretion without the aid and advice of
the Council of Ministers for the following reasons:
a. The provision mandates the Lieutenant Governor to make a
reference to the Central Government of every proposal which
relates to the appointments stipulated in the provision. This is
clear from the usage of the words “the Lieutenant Governor shall
make a prior reference;
b. Rule 55(2) begins with the phrase “subject to any instructions
which may from time to time be issued by the Central
Government”. The exercise of power by the Lieutenant Governor
under Rule 55(2)(b) is subject to the control of the Central
Government;
c. As discussed above, Rule 55(2)(b) deals with proposals for the
appointment of the Commissioner of Police and the Secretaries
In-charge of the Home and Land Departments in addition to the
Chief Secretary. The Chief Secretary has been brought within
the purview of Rule 55(2)(b) because the Chief Secretary of the
GNCTD exercises overall supervision and control over all the
480 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 16 S.C.R.

departments including the departments which are relatable to the
excluded subjects; and
d. The Central Government has a veto over the proposal in terms
of Rule 56.
24. The position which emerges from the above analysis is that unlike
other States, the GNCTD only has the power to propose a candidate for the
appointment as the Chief Secretary. The Lieutenant Governor is bound to
refer the proposal to the Central Government and the decision of the Central
Government on the proposal is ﬁnal.
25. Section 45A(d) deﬁnes the Chief Secretary to mean the Chief
Secretary of the GNCTD “appointed by the Central Government”. At this
stage, it may not be necessary to enquire into whether clause (d) of Section
45A is purely a deﬁnition section, as the petitioners submit, or whether
it contains a substantive power of appointment, as is submitted by the
respondents. At the present stage, it would suﬃce to note that there can be
no dispute about the basic position that the Chief Secretary, as the head of
the administration, exercises jurisdiction of an administrative nature over the
entirety of subjects which fall within the domain of the executive functions
of GNCTD which would include those subjects (Entries 1, 2 and 18 of List
II) over which the Legislative Assembly and the State Government do not
have jurisdiction.
26. In the 2023 Constitution Bench judgment, this Court, while holding
that the subject of services in Entry 41 of List II falls within the domain of
GNCTD, has nonetheless clariﬁed that this would not extend to control over
services insofar as they pertain to the excluded subjects. In the very nature of
things, it would not be possible or for that matter practicable to divide these
functions of the Chief Secretary or bifurcate them between those areas which
fall within the domain of GNCTD and those which lie outside. Nor can such
a bifurcation be logically attempted based on the numerical strength of the
number of administrative subjects which lie within or outside the province
of GNCTD. Once it emerges that the Chief Secretary performs important
functions, among other things, in relation to the excluded subjects as well,
it would be farfetched to postulate that the Central Government is divested
of the power to appoint the Chief Secretary.
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI v. UNION OF INDIA 481
& ORS. [DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, CJI]

27. The petitioners while referring to the observations of this Court in
Royappa (supra) contend that the Central Government cannot unilaterally
appoint the Chief Secretary because the Chief Secretary in addition to the
subjects of land, police, and public order also assists the Government of
NCTD on a variety of other matters which falls within the legislative and
executive competence of NCTD. However, these are grounds which can be
raised when the challenge to the constitutional validity of the provisions of
the 2023 Amendment Act is adjudicated. In view of the fact that this Court
has not stayed the provisions of the NCT Amendment Act, this Court must
adjudicate the controversy based on the position of law as it exists today.
28. The petitioners seek that the Court to appoint one of the ﬁve senior
most oﬃcers from the pool of oﬃcers who are serving in the AGMUT cadre
and who has had the experience of having served as the Chief Secretary in
the Government of NCTD. The relief sought by the petitioner is beyond
the scope of powers exercisable by this Court. This Court cannot usurp the
powers of the appointing authority conferred by law.
29. The issue which survives for consideration is as to whether the
Central Government has the power to extend the service of an incumbent
Chief Secretary. The Union Government, inter alia, relied upon the
provisions of Rule 16 of the AIS (DCRB) Rules 1958. Dr Singhvi urged
that the third proviso to Rule 16 clearly stipulates that an extension of
service can be granted to a person holding the post of Chief Secretary to a
State Government on the recommendations made by the concerned State
Government “with full justiﬁcation and in public interest” with the prior
approval of the Central Government. Hence, it was urged that the power
of extension can be exercised only on the recommendation of the State
Government which, in the present case, must mean, the GNCTD.
30. On the other hand, an eﬀort has been made on behalf of the Union
Government to submit that in a case involving a joint cadre, the expression
State Government must mean the Joint Cadre Authority and bearing in
mind the Transaction of Business Rules 1961 of the Union Government,
it is the Ministry of Home Aﬀairs which alone would exercise jurisdiction
on general questions relating to public services in the Union Territories and
service matters pertaining to IAS and IPS oﬃcers serving in connection with
the aﬀairs of the Union Territories.
482 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 16 S.C.R.

31. This submission of the Union Government has not found acceptance
in the 2023 Constitution Bench judgment. Paragraph 173 of the judgment
(extracted above) holds that the GNCTD would exercise jurisdiction over
public services in NCTD.
32. Rule 16 of the 1958 Rules is a general rule which is applicable to
members of the service holding the post of Chief Secretary across all States.
The provision does not make a distinction between the Chief Secretary
serving in NCTD and the Chief Secretaries serving in other States though the
procedure for the appointment of the Chief Secretary of NCTD is diﬀerent
from the procedure for the appointment of Chief Secretaries in other States
in terms of the 1954 Rules read with the Transaction of Business Rules. The
post of Chief Secretary in the GNCTD is a post entrusted with signiﬁcant
functional responsibilities including overall administrative control and
supervision over subjects which stand excluded from the legislative domain
and the executive powers of the GNCTD. In relation to Chief Secretaries who
are appointed to the States, Rule 16 of the 1958 Rules contemplates that an
extension can be granted with the prior approval of the State Government
on the recommendation by the State Government with a “full justiﬁcation”
and in “public interest”. This provision has been made in relation to the role
of the State Government where the Chief Secretaries perform functions in
relation to the States. The position of the Chief Secretary of the GNCTD
is signiﬁcantly distinct in that the Chief Secretary performs delegated
executive functions which straddle both subjects which fall within the
executive and legislative competence of GNCTD as well as those which
lie outside. Consequently, the restrictions which operate in relation to the
grant of extension under Rule 16 of the 1958 Rules in relation to the Chief
Secretary of one of the State Governments would not stricto senso apply
in relation to the GNCTD. Rule 16 undoubtedly would, however, apply in
relation to the extension of service of such other oﬃcers of GNCTD whose
functions do not extend to any of the subjects which are excluded, namely,
Entries 1, 2 and 18 of List 2 and Entries 64, 65 and 66 insofar as thy are
relatable to Entries 1, 2 and 18.
33. For the above reasons, we have come to the conclusion that at
this stage, bearing in mind the principles which have been enumerated in
the judgment of this Court in 2023 Constitution Bench judgment, and the
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI v. UNION OF INDIA 483
& ORS. [DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, CJI]

subsequent developments which have taken place resulting in the enactment
of the amendment to the GNCTD Act 1991, the decision of the Union
Government to extend the services of the incumbent Chief Secretary for a
period of six months cannot be construed to be violative of law.
34. We, however, clarify that the analysis in this order is conﬁned to
the evaluation of the case at the present stage without entering into any
conclusive determination of the issues which are pending for adjudication
before the Constitution Bench.
35. We also deem it appropriate to record a few observations on the
role of the Chief Secretary. As observed by this Court in Royappa (supra),
the post of the Chief Secretary is a “post of great conﬁdence- a lynchpin in
the administration.” This Court in the 2023 Constitution Bench judgment
observed that civil servants are required to be politically neutral and must
abide by the directions of the elected arm to give eﬀect to the principle
underlying the triple-chain of collective responsibility. The post of a Chief
Secretary is uniquely placed. The Chief Secretary performs functions which
fall both within and outside the executive competence of the GNCTD. The
Chief Secretary though appointed by the Central Government, must comply
with the directions of the elected government over matters on which their
executive competence extends. The actions (or inactions) of the Chief
Secretary must not put the elected government at a standstill.
36. The writ petition is disposed of in terms of the above observations.
Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

Headnotes prepared by: Writ petition disposed of.
Divya Pandey