Today, On 15th January, The Delhi High Court has dismissed a PIL challenging Deputy CM Manish Sisodia’s residence in a government bungalow. The court stated that if any rules are violated, the concerned authorities have the power to take appropriate action. It emphasized that there was no need for judicial intervention in this matter. The decision has put an end to the legal challenge against Sisodia’s accommodation.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that questioned Manish Sisodia’s continued residence in a government bungalow, despite his lack of a Ministerial role.
The bench, led by Acting Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru, declined to intervene judicially, stating that the relevant authorities are fully equipped to take appropriate action if any rules or regulations are breached.
The Court stated that if any rules are breached, the relevant authorities are fully empowered to take necessary action as needed.
The Court remarked,
“We do not find it appropriate to issue any orders regarding the petition. If any rules are violated, the concerned authorities are entirely competent to take action as required. Dismissed,”
The petition refers to the government bungalow assigned to Sisodia, which was subsequently reallocated to Atishi in March 2023 following Sisodia’s arrest related to the liquor policy case.
The PIL claimed that despite Sisodia being jailed in March 2023, his entire family continued to live in the government bungalow even after his resignation.
The petition stated,
“It is quite surprising that while the aforementioned bungalow was allotted to Ms. Atishi Merlena in March 2023, and she was residing in Jangpura, New Delhi, she never objected to Mr. Manish Sisodia’s family occupying the bungalow,”
In his petition, Sanjeev Jain pointed out that even after Manish Sisodia was jailed in March 2023, his entire family continued to live in the government bungalow assigned to him. Jain argued that this situation violates the rules governing the allotment and vacation of government bungalows, particularly in light of Sisodia’s resignation from his ministerial position in the Government of NCT of Delhi.
The petitioner maintained that the ongoing occupancy of the bungalow by Sisodia’s family, following his arrest and resignation, contradicts established regulations regarding government accommodations. He further mentioned that, according to the prevailing rules, every government minister is entitled to a bungalow for personal use.
Jain cited that the Chief Minister was assigned Bungalow No. AB-17, Mathura Road, New Delhi, for both residence and ministerial responsibilities.
Additionally, the petitioner stressed that it is a well-established rule that the family members of the allottee such as spouses, children, stepchildren, legally adopted children, parents, siblings, and others who typically reside with and depend on the officer are permitted to occupy the government bungalow.
The controversy surrounding Manish Sisodia’s residence in a government bungalow arose after a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was filed, challenging his occupancy of the property. Critics argued that Sisodia, who resigned as the Deputy Chief Minister of Delhi amid legal troubles, should vacate the government accommodation, as he no longer held a ministerial position.
Supporters countered this by emphasizing that government housing policies often provide time for former ministers to vacate, and some cited his significant contributions to Delhi’s governance, particularly in education, as justification for leniency. The Delhi High Court dismissed the PIL, stating it lacked merit, and upheld the allocation as within legal and procedural bounds.
The case highlighted broader issues of fairness and transparency in the allocation of government accommodations.
Case Title: Sanjeev Jain v. UOI & Anr.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
