Saxena's correspondence expressed that Kejriwal's description was not only an insult to Atishi but also to the President of India, who appointed her, and to the democratic values enshrined in the Constitution. He emphasized that such terminology has no constitutional basis and reflects a disregard for democratic principles.
In her rebuttal, Atishi articulated that all elected officials are inherently temporary, serving only for the duration of their terms. She expressed amusement at Saxena's offense, suggesting that acknowledging the transient nature of political appointments aligns with democratic realities. Atishi further accused the LG's office of obstructing welfare initiatives, notably the Mahila Samman Yojana, which aims to provide financial assistance to women in Delhi. She contended that such obstruction exemplifies the politicization of the LG's office and undermines public welfare.
This exchange underscores the ongoing tensions between Delhi's elected government and the LG's office. Saxena's letter also criticized Kejriwal for making unauthorized announcements about schemes for senior citizens and women, alleging that these actions undermine Atishi's leadership. He noted that public notices from Delhi government departments have cautioned citizens against registering for non-existent schemes announced by the former chief minister, highlighting administrative concerns.
Atishi's response accused the LG of focusing on criticism rather than constructive cooperation, alleging that his office has become a proxy for the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). She highlighted issues such as the alleged distribution of money to lure voters and the perceived inaction on ensuring the city's safety, particularly concerning crimes against women and children. Atishi asserted that such actions have tarnished the legacy of the LG's office and called for a focus on governance over political maneuvering.
The friction between Delhi's elected government and the LG's office is not unprecedented. In November 2024, Saxena publicly praised Atishi, stating she was "a thousand times better" than her predecessor, a remark that drew attention amid the ongoing power dynamics in the capital's administration.
As Delhi approaches assembly elections, these exchanges highlight the complex interplay between the city's administrative and political structures. The AAP government, led by Kejriwal until his resignation in September 2024, has often been at odds with the LG's office over jurisdictional and policy matters. Atishi's tenure as chief minister, marked by her commitment to continue Kejriwal's policies, reflects the party's strategy to maintain its governance model while addressing internal and external challenges.
The debate over the "temporary" designation touches upon broader questions of constitutional interpretation and the roles of appointed versus elected officials in Delhi's unique administrative framework. While the LG's office represents the central government's authority, the elected government seeks to assert its mandate from the people. This dichotomy has historically led to conflicts over policy implementation and administrative control.
Atishi's assertion that the LG's actions have damaged the respect for his office points to a deepening rift that could influence public perception ahead of the elections. Her emphasis on continuing Kejriwal's legacy suggests a strategic positioning to leverage the former chief minister's popularity while addressing criticisms of the current administration.
The LG's concerns about unauthorized announcements and the existence of non-approved schemes raise questions about administrative protocols and the communication channels between the LG's office and the elected government. Such issues are pivotal in ensuring that governance remains transparent and accountable to the public.
As the situation develops, the interactions between Delhi's chief minister and the lieutenant governor will continue to be a focal point in the city's political landscape. The resolution of these disputes will have implications not only for the functioning of Delhi's government but also for the broader discourse on the balance of power between state and central authorities in India's federal structure.