Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
G. Rohini, C.J. and Jayant Nath

JUDGMENT

G. Rohini, C.J.

1. Though based on different set of facts, the controversy in all the petitions centers on common issues relating to the exercise of legislative power and executive control in the administration of National Capital Territory of Delhi (NCTD).

2. The parties to the writ petitions and the orders impugned have been set out in the following Table so as to get a glimpse of the controversy involved in each writ petition.

3. Except W.P.(C) No. 5888/2015 and W.P.(Crl.) No. 2099/2015, in all other writ petitions the impugned orders have been challenged primarily on the ground that the said orders having been passed without placing the decision of the Council of Ministers before the Lt. Governor for his concurrence/views are illegal and unconstitutional. Out of the said petitions, W.P.(C) No. 8867/2015 has been filed by the Union of India whereas the rest of the petitions are more or less in the nature of public interest litigation.

4. W.P.(C) No. 5888/2015 and W.P.(Crl.) No. 2099/2015 have been filed by the Govt. of NCT of Delhi (GNCTD). The grievance in W.P.(C) No. 5888/2015 is that by virtue of the impugned notifications, the legislative and executive powers conferred on the Govt. of NCT of Delhi under Article 239AA of the Constitution in respect of matters relating to "services" have been withdrawn and are sought to be exercised by the Central Government, apart from curtailing the powers of the Anti Corruption Branch of Government of NCT of Delhi to take cognizance of offences against the officers, employees and functionaries of the Central Government. The primary contention is that the said notifications are contrary to the Constitutional scheme.

5. In W.P.(Crl.) No. 2099/2015, the appointment of a Special Public Prosecutor by the Lt. Governor has been challenged contending inter alia that the Lt.Governor of NCT of Delhi is not competent either to appoint a Special Public Prosecutor independently or to interfere with the appointment made by the Govt. of NCT of Delhi, having regard to the scheme of Article 239AA of the Constitution of India (for short 'Constitution') read with the provisions of the Government of NCT of Delhi Act, 1991 and the Rules made thereunder.

6. Before proceeding further, it is necessary to place on record that the hearing in this batch of writ petitions had commenced on 24.09.2015 on which date Shri Dayan Krishnan, the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner/GNCTD in W.P.(C) No. 5888/2015 (agreed to be taken as a lead case) was heard in part. He had concluded his arguments on 02.11.2015 and thereafter from 27.01.2016 onwards, we had heard Shri Sanjay Jain, the learned ASG appearing for the respondents/Union of India in W.P.(C) No. 5888/2015 on various dates till 25.02.2016.

7. At the request of the learned counsel for both the parties, the further hearing was adjourned from time to time to enable them t........