The Hindu Editorial Vocabulary– Feb 20, 2022; Day 403

Aldermen altercation (Noisy quarrel): On the Delhi Mayor poll 

By barring Lieutenant-Governor’s nominees from voting, the Supreme Court of India has scuttled (cause to fail) mischief in Delhi

The Supreme Court of India has rightly shot down (Thwart the passage of) the brazen (Unrestrained by convention or propriety) and legally untenable (incapable of being defended or justified) claim that nominated members of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) may be allowed to vote in the election of its Mayor. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) sought to bend the rules to allow the 10 aldermen, nominated by the Lieutenant-Governor, to vote in the election, despite the law limiting the process to elected Councillors. That a question concerning a mayoral election should engage national attention is due to the political acrimony (A rough and bitter manner) between the ruling BJP at the Centre and the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), which runs the elected regime in the National Capital Territory of Delhi. The BJP sought to interpret the relevant provisions in the Constitution and the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act in such a way that the specific bar on nominated members voting in “meetings” of the corporation should not be applied to its first meeting, at which the Mayor and Deputy Mayor are elected. It takes a particularly perverse (showing a deliberate and determined desire to behave in a way that most people think is wrong, unacceptable or unreasonable) political imagination to argue that “meetings” do not include the “first meeting”. Three attempts to hold the mayoral election, following the MCD polls that took place in December 2022, were stalled by clashes between AAP and BJP councillors over this question. The verdict vindicates (Show to be right by providing justification or proof) the position of AAP, which has 134 councillors in the 250-member Council, against the BJP’s 104.

It is unfortunate that before the Court, the Lt. Governor also took the questionable political stand that the restriction on the right to vote in Article 243R(2) of the Constitution and the proviso to Section 3(3)(b)(i) of the Act was limited to regular meetings, and not to the first meeting of the Council. The Court rejected the argument, noting that the law provides for the nomination of 10 people “with special knowledge and experience in municipal administration”, but without any voting right. In keeping with the Court’s order, Lt. Governor V.K. Saxena has now approved February 22 as the date for the election of the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and six members of the Standing Committee. Last year, Parliament passed a law to merge the three corporations in Delhi into a single entity, a decision criticised for reversing the trend of having compact local bodies for better delivery of civic services. Delhi’s lack of statehood is a source of conflict between the Centre and the elected regime in the capital territory, but the political protagonists (A person who backs a politician or a team etc.) should not allow Delhi’s administrative structures to be plagued (Annoy continually or chronically) by the tussle (Disorderly fighting). The core message from a Constitution Bench judgment of 2018, that elected bodies should not be undermined by unelected administrators, is yet to hit home (reach an intended target).

Want to improve your vocabulary further? Download the Lists of Word-Meanings of Previous Months here.

• Sign Up on Practicemock for Updated Current Affairs, Free Topic Tests and Free Mini Mocks
• Sign Up Here to Download Free Study Material