Delhi HC declines plea by AAP for temporary use of Minister's house for office use [Read Judgment]

NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday declined a plea by Aam Aadmi Party to direct the Union government to allow use of a housing unit presently in occupation of a Delhi Minister on a temporary basis for its office use.

A single judge bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad, however, directed the Union government to consider the request of the petitioner within six weeks and take a decision by passing a detailed order as to why even one housing unit from the GPRA cannot be allotted to it when all other political parties have been allotted similar accommodation from the GPRA for the purpose.

"Let a detailed order deciding the request of the petitioner be provided to it so that it can take other remedial steps available to it under law if the request of the petitioner is not being considered adequately," the bench said.

Earlier, the Supreme Court has on March 4, 2024 asked the AAP to vacate bungalow number 206 at Rouse Avenue here which was to be utilised for district judiciary.

Hearing a writ petition by the AAP, the bench said this court is not prepared to accept the plea of the petitioner to issue a mandamus to the Land and Development Office to permit it to establish its office at Plots No 23 & 24, DDU Marg here, a portion of which is currently in possession of a Delhi minister.

"However, the fact that the petitioner is a national political party cannot be overlooked," the bench said.

Looking at the consolidated guidelines, the bench noted it indicated that national political parties have a right to retain/secure allotment of one housing unit from general pool in Delhi for their office use on payment of licence fee and the said accommodation will be provided for a period of three years during which party would acquire a plot of land in an institutional area and will construct its own accommodation for party office.

The petitioner, a national party, has approached the court seeking a direction to the Union government to allot a housing unit on temporary basis to the petitioner from the General Pool Residential Accommodation (GPRA) for office use on payment of license fee as provided to national parties till an office is constructed by the petitioner on the land which will be allotted for permanent use in accordance with the Consolidated Instructions for allotment of Government Accommodation from General Pool to national and state level political parties.

The petitioner was offered Plots No 3, 7 & 8, MB Road, Sector VI, Saket, for construction of their office in their capacity as a state party in 2014, however, the offer was rejected by the petitioner.

The Union government, however, said had the petitioner taken the land offered to them in 2014, their office would have been constructed by 2017 and the petitioner would have had a permanent office. It said that the petitioner was allotted bungalow No 206, Rouse Avenue on December 31, 2015 to be used as its temporary party office and the petitioner should have constructed its office in the meantime.

The court, however, said, "The said argument cannot be accepted. The fact that the petitioner has not accepted the allotment of Plots No 3, 7 & 8, MB Road, Sector VI, Saket, for construction of their permanent office as a state party in 2014 or the fact that the petitioner has not responded to the offer of the L&DO regarding allotment of Plots No. P2 & P3 M B Road, Sector – VI, Saket, to the petitioner for construction of its party office as a national party in 2024, is of no consequence and cannot be taken an argument to deny the petitioner a temporary accommodation to be used as a party office for a period of three years as the claim of the petitioner is on the basis of the fact that it is a national party," the court said.

The court also noted the fact as to whether the petitioner would be entitled to a plot of land in central Delhi or not is subject matter of another writ petition.

The dispute regarding allotment of land to the petitioner cannot be a reason to deprive it from its entitlement to be given a housing unit to be used as a temporary office in accordance with the Consolidated Instructions for allotment of Government Accommodation from General Pool to national and state level political parties, the bench added.

The court further noted on being recognised as a national party, the petitioner on April 17, 2023 and August 22, 2023 has requested the DoE for allotment of a housing unit from the GPRA to be used as an office premises until a parcel of land is allotted to it for construction of office premises.

"There is no material on record to show that the said request of the petitioner has been rejected. This court can take judicial notice of the fact that there has always been pressure on the pool of house available for allotment to the officers but that pressure has not deterred allotment of houses to other political parties for office purposes in accordance with the Consolidated Instructions for allotment of Government Accommodation from General Pool to National and State level Political Parties. The fact that there is a huge pressure cannot be the only reason for the respondents to deny the petitioner its right to be allotted an accommodation from the GPRA for setting up its party office," the bench said.  

[Read Judgment]