The Supreme Court of India quashed the eviction of government officers from Sujan Singh Park flats near Khan Market, ruling rent law doesn’t apply. It held eviction cannot happen without a clear clause in the lease, limiting the landlord’s remedy to rent recovery only.
The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday set aside the eviction order against government officers staying in Sujan Singh Park flats located near Khan Market. The case, titled Union of India v. Sri Sobha Singh and Sons, has brought important clarity on how government grants are treated under Indian law, especially when disputes over rent and eviction arise.
A Bench comprising Justice Sanjoy Karol and Justice PK Mishra allowed the appeal filed by the Central government in 2022. This appeal had challenged a 2020 decision of the Delhi High Court, which had earlier upheld eviction proceedings initiated against the government.
The dispute goes back many decades. The residential flats in Sujan Singh Park were leased to the government as far back as 1944 at concessional rates under what is known as a perpetual lease. Out of 84 flats built by the company, the government occupied 13 flats along with several servant quarters and garages. Rent payments were made regularly until 1989, after which disagreements between the parties led to prolonged litigation.
In 1998, the respondent company approached the rent controller seeking eviction due to non-payment of rent. The Additional Rent Controller ruled in favour of the company, and this decision was upheld in subsequent appeals, including by the Delhi High Court in January 2020. The High Court also directed the government to clear pending rent dues.
However, the Supreme Court has now overturned these findings. The Court clearly stated that the Delhi Rent Control Act does not apply to this case, meaning the rent controller did not have the authority to hear the matter. Instead, the Court held that the provisions of the Government Grants Act would govern the dispute.
The judgment emphasized that government grants operate under their own legal framework and cannot be overridden by general laws like rent control legislation unless specifically provided. The Court further clarified that the Government Grants Act does not allow eviction simply because rent has not been paid.
Importantly, the Court observed,
“Equally, in the absence of any express stipulation in the lease deed providing for eviction on account of non-payment of rent, no such right can be inferred. The grant must operate according to its tenor and its silence cannot be converted into a ground … The Respondent’s right, therefore, is confined to recovery of rent in accordance with law. The appeal is allowed,”
the Court ruled.
This observation became the central reasoning behind the decision, as the lease agreement itself did not contain any clause permitting eviction on grounds of unpaid rent.
When the matter first came up before the Supreme Court in 2022, the Central government had made serious allegations, stating that bouncers were used to forcibly evict government officers from the premises. Following this, the Supreme Court had stayed the High Court’s eviction order in April 2022.
Before the apex court, the Central government strongly argued that Section 3 of the Government Grants Act overrides other laws. It submitted that once a property is granted under this Act, provisions of other laws like the Delhi Rent Control Act or the Transfer of Property Act cannot be applied if they conflict with the terms of the grant.
The government argued,
“Therefore, any legislation which is contrary to the notions in the Government Grant, will not apply to a government property granted in favour of a specific person. It is therefore submitted that the provisions of the Grant Act will have an overriding effect over any other law, in force, which is contrary thereto,”
It further pointed out that the earlier decisions by the tribunal and the High Court were legally incorrect.
The plea stated,
“The Tribunal vide order dated 01.09.2007 erroneously held that the contested property was covered under the provisions of the Delhi Rent Control Act (DRCA). Moreover, the Hon’ble High Court affirmed the said finding vide order dated January 8, 2020. It is most reverentially submitted that the Grants Act is a special statute and so, it would prevail over other statutes and so, the provisions contained in the Grants Act will have an overriding effect on the provisions contained in the DRCA. Furthermore, it is submitted that the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 has expressly been excluded from the arena of Government Grants,”
Accepting these arguments, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of the Central government and allowed the appeal. The decision reinforces the legal principle that special laws like the Government Grants Act take precedence over general laws, and that eviction rights cannot be assumed unless clearly mentioned in the agreement.
This judgment is likely to have wider implications in similar disputes involving government-leased properties across India, especially where old grant-based arrangements are still in force.
Click Here to Read More Reports on Sujan Singh
