Supreme Court Expresses Shock Over AAP Party Office on Land Designated for Delhi High Court

Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!

The Supreme Court of India, on Tuesday led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud remarked during the hearing, “No individual or entity is above the law. How can a political party claim control over that land? The High Court must be given unobstructed possession. What purpose will the High Court serve with it? Solely for the benefit of the public and citizens. Why was the land allocated to the Delhi High Court in the first place?”

Supreme Court Expresses Shock Over AAP Party Office on Land Designated for Delhi High Court

The Supreme Court of India, on Tuesday (13 February) led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, expressed its astonishment and concern over the encroachment of land allocated for the Delhi High Court by a political party. This revelation came to light during a hearing on February 13, where the court was addressing the issue of developing infrastructure for the Delhi Judiciary, a directive issued by the court last year to the Delhi Government.

Senior Advocate K Parameshwar, serving as the amicus curiae in the case, brought this pressing matter to the bench’s notice, highlighting that the land meant for judicial purposes had been overtaken by a political entity. Although Parameshwar refrained from naming the party directly, citing a desire not to politicize the issue, his disclosure prompted a response filled with disbelief from CJI Chandrachud, who questioned the legality and propriety of such an occupation:

“How can there be a party office? You can’t take the law into your own hands.”

The Law Secretary to the Delhi Government, Bharat Parashar, participating in the hearing via an online platform, shed light on the situation by stating that the land was allocated to the said political party through a cabinet resolution in 2016. He further informed the court that efforts were now being made to reassign the land to the political party and return the originally allocated plot back to the judiciary. Parashar also noted that prior to 2016, the site housed a bungalow used by a minister before being taken over by the political party, which has since transformed the building into its office and erected temporary structures around it.

CJI Chandrachud, addressing Senior Advocate Wasim Qadri and Additional Solicitor General of India Vikramjit Banerjee, both representing the Delhi Government, demanded immediate action and clarity on when the High Court would regain possession of its land. Emphasizing the importance of the land for public amenities rather than private or political use, he stated,

“Mr.Qadri and Mr.Vikramjit Banerjee, you better find out and tell us tomorrow when is the possession being given back to the High Court. What is this? We are not asking for judges’ bungalow or something…we are asking for public amenities. And a political party is sitting tight on that! Why did you allot it to the High Court then? Tell us when are you going to give unencumbered possession to the High Court. This has to come to an end. The High Court is going to use it for the citizens and the residents of Delhi. Tell us what you are doing.”

Though the political party in question was not identified in court, it was later independently confirmed to be the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP). This incident is not the first time the Supreme Court has voiced its frustration with the Delhi Government’s handling of judicial infrastructure needs. Previously, CJI Chandrachud had criticized the government for its slow response in approving funds for infrastructure projects for the Delhi High Court, emphasizing the lack of justification for such a “lackadaisical approach” towards meeting the demands of the Delhi district judiciary.

This ongoing saga underscores the critical need for clear demarcation and respect for judicial properties, ensuring that the infrastructure meant to serve the public and uphold justice is not compromised by political or other interests. The Supreme Court’s firm stance on this issue sends a strong message about the sanctity of judicial premises and the imperative to safeguard them for the intended purpose of serving the citizens and residents of Delhi.

author

Vaibhav Ojha

ADVOCATE | LLM | BBA.LLB | SENIOR LEGAL EDITOR @ LAW CHAKRA

Similar Posts