Page:29357 2016 1 1501 44512 Judgement 11-May-2023.pdf/11

PART B B. Submissions 8. Dr. A M Singhvi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant, made the following submissions:

a. The Legislative Assembly of NCTD has the power to enact laws under Entry 41 of List II of the Seventh Schedule. The power cannot be excluded merely because the entry uses the term “state public services” and not “Union Territory public services”. In fact, the Delhi Legislative Assembly has enacted laws that fall within Entry 41;

b. Even if it is found that the legislature of NCTD has not exercised legislative power related to Entry 41 of List II, it does not imply that the power ceases to exist;

c. NCTD has legislative power and executive power over all entries in List II other than entries 1,2, and 18 which have been expressly excluded by Article 239AA;

d. The phrase “insofar as such matter is applicable to Union Territories” in Article 239AA is inclusionary and not exclusionary. Multiple entries in List II and List III use the term “State.” The phrase “insofar as such matter is applicable to Union Territories” is a facilitative phrase which permits such entries being made available to the Union Territory of NCTD without an amendment of the Lists in the Seventh Schedule. Without the facilitative phrase, NCTD would not have legislative competence over those entries in Lists II and III which use the term “State”;

e. NCTD is sui generis. It cannot be brought within the common class of ‘Union Territories’;