Turf War in the Capital: AAP vs BJP in Delhi’s Power Struggle Deepens
Explore the deepening political power struggle between AAP and BJP in Delhi, focusing on the legal battles, administrative fallout, and constitutional challenges.
NewsSutra
In the corridors of New Delhi’s power, a bitter and prolonged battle is unfolding—not between two nations, but between two arms of governance. The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), elected to run the Delhi government, finds itself locked in an intensifying political and administrative tug-of-war with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-appointed Lieutenant Governor (L-G). What began as a skirmish over jurisdiction has snowballed into a protracted conflict with national implications. As courtrooms become battlegrounds and files turn into weapons, India’s capital has become a microcosm of deeper federal tensions.
The Genesis of the Conflict
The seeds of this conflict were sown long before the 2024 general elections. Ever since AAP swept the Delhi Assembly elections in 2015 and then again in 2020 with a commanding majority, tensions with the BJP-led central government have been near-constant. Delhi, unlike full-fledged states, is a Union Territory with a unique governance structure. The elected government handles daily administration, but key subjects like land, police, and public order lie with the L-G, who is appointed by the Centre.
This dual power model has led to friction between the two entities, often resulting in administrative gridlocks, delayed policy implementations, and legal showdowns. While the Constitution grants Delhi’s government limited autonomy, the extent of that autonomy has repeatedly come under legal and political scrutiny.
Key Flashpoints in the Ongoing Battle
1. Control Over Services
The most contentious issue has been the control over bureaucrats. In May 2023, the Supreme Court ruled that the Delhi government had legislative and executive power over services, except in areas of land, police, and public order. This ruling was seen as a massive victory for AAP.
However, within a week, the Centre promulgated the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (Amendment) Ordinance, 2023, effectively overruling the court’s verdict. This ordinance led to the formation of the National Capital Civil Services Authority (NCCSA)—a body comprising the Chief Minister, Chief Secretary, and Principal Home Secretary—which would make decisions on service-related matters. Crucially, the L-G retained the final say.
AAP termed it a “constitutional coup,” alleging that the Centre was attempting to “cripple democracy.” The ordinance was subsequently passed in Parliament, with support from NDA allies, despite sharp criticism from opposition benches.
2. The Delhi Services Bill
The controversy deepened further when the Delhi Services Bill, formalizing the ordinance, was introduced in Parliament. AAP, along with opposition parties under the I.N.D.I.A. alliance banner, staged multiple protests both within and outside Parliament. Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal undertook a nationwide campaign to rally opposition leaders and highlight what he called an “attack on federalism.”
However, the BJP remained firm, insisting that Delhi’s unique status necessitated central oversight. According to Union Home Minister Amit Shah, the bill was essential to prevent “misgovernance” and maintain “national security” in the national capital.
Legal Tussles and Constitutional Questions
The battle has not been limited to the streets or the legislature; it has seen repeated interventions from the judiciary. The Supreme Court, while upholding the Delhi government’s rights over services in its May 2023 ruling, has also agreed to examine the constitutional validity of the ordinance and subsequent bill.
Legal experts argue that the heart of the issue lies in Article 239AA of the Constitution, which grants Delhi its special status. The ambiguity in interpreting the balance of power between the elected government and the Centre is at the core of the repeated confrontations.
In March 2024, the apex court issued notices to the Centre on AAP’s plea challenging the ordinance, indicating that the constitutional bench would examine whether the Centre can dilute powers given by a prior Supreme Court verdict.
Administrative Fallout: Governance at a Standstill
As the turf war escalates, Delhi’s citizens are bearing the brunt of administrative paralysis. Major development projects—ranging from school infrastructure upgrades to water supply reforms—have faced delays due to inter-departmental disputes.
In 2024, the Delhi government accused the L-G office of stalling over 200 files, including budget approvals and proposals for mohalla clinics. The L-G, in turn, accused the government of bypassing procedures and misusing public funds. The deadlock has resulted in delays in garbage clearance tenders, unauthorised construction crackdowns, and even a standoff over CCTV surveillance deployment.
This constant push-and-pull has created a dysfunctional governance model in the city. Bureaucrats remain unsure about whose orders to follow. AAP ministers have publicly claimed that their signatures on important policy decisions are often rendered meaningless by the L-G's refusal to clear files.
Political Calculations and National Implications
The AAP-BJP tussle in Delhi is more than just a local feud—it is part of a larger political narrative.
For AAP, positioning itself as a victim of central overreach helps build its image as a party fighting for constitutional democracy and state rights. For the BJP, exerting control over the capital city allows it to showcase administrative authority and reinforce the Centre’s primacy.
As the opposition alliance I.N.D.I.A. attempted to mount a unified challenge in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, Delhi became a symbolic battleground. The ordinance and bill were used by AAP and its allies to project the BJP as authoritarian, especially in regional pockets sensitive to federal autonomy, such as Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, and Kerala.
What Lies Ahead?
The future of Delhi’s governance model hinges on the Supreme Court’s final verdict, expected later in 2025. If the ordinance is struck down, AAP will likely regain control over services. If upheld, it would set a precedent for reduced autonomy in other Union Territories with elected governments, such as Puducherry.
Moreover, the outcome may influence Centre-state dynamics across the country. At stake is not just bureaucratic control but the core principle of federalism, as envisioned in the Indian Constitution.
In the meantime, citizens continue to grapple with the real-world consequences—delays in services, stalled infrastructure projects, and a deepening sense that political rivalry has taken precedence over public welfare.
Conclusion
The Delhi power struggle is no longer just a constitutional debate—it is a test of India’s federal architecture. While AAP demands greater autonomy to govern, the BJP insists on oversight in the national capital for broader security and administrative coherence.
As the legal, political, and administrative standoff continues, one thing remains clear: Delhi is no longer just the capital of India—it is also the battlefield where the very idea of decentralised governance is being contested.
