New Delhi, Oct 1 (IANS): The Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed the withdrawal of a plea seeking contempt proceedings against Delhi Mayor Shelly Oberoi for "arbitrarily postponing" the election of a member of the Standing Committee of the MCD (Municipal Corporation of Delhi).

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan observed that no clear case of contempt of the apex court’s orders was made out.

Sensing the disinclination of the apex court to entertain the matter, senior advocate Sonia Mathur, who appeared on behalf of BJP councillor Raja Iqbal Singh, sought liberty to withdraw the petition.

Ultimately, the plea was dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to approach the appropriate forum. The plea, filed through advocate Shoumendu Mukherji, said that the scheduled election for the sixth member of the Standing Committee was adjourned twice by the Mayor, citing issues with carrying & usage of mobile phones in the voting area.

"The Mayor arbitrarily postponed the election to October 5, 2024, leading to concerns that the democratic process was being deliberately obstructed," it said.

However, Lt Governor V.K. Saxena ordered the MCD Commissioner to ensure the elections take place, issuing strict instructions to conduct the poll without further delay. On the directions of the Lt Governor, the MCD Commissioner decided to hold the polls on September 27, where the Additional Commissioner took over as the Presiding Officer instead of the elected Mayor.

The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) said that contrary to legal provisions, the Lt Governor empowered an IAS officer to convene the meeting, rendering the election both unconstitutional and unlawful. One of the members of the Standing Committee, Kamaljeet Sahrawat, resigned after being elected as a Member of Parliament in Lok Sabha polls.

In a judgment delivered in August, the top court upheld the decision of the Delhi Lt Governor to appoint 'aldermen' to the MCD without the aid and advice of the elected government. It ruled that the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act made by Parliament required the Lt Governor to act at his discretion and the power to be exercised is the statutory duty of the Lt Governor and not the executive power of the state.