The Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) informed the Supreme Court on Thursday that the Rouse Avenue court area, where its party office is situated, is not an intrusion because it was legally given to the AAP long before it was designated as a site for the expansion of the Rouse Avenue court complex. The AAP refuted the statement stated in the top court’s ruling from February 13 that the AAP office on Rouse Avenue in Delhi was constructed over “encroached land” that was initially assigned to the Delhi High Court in an application submitted to the Supreme Court.
The Subject Premises were formally granted to the Applicant by the Government of the NCT of Delhi (GNCTD) on December 31, 2015, for its State Unit Office; thus, they are far from being an instance of “encroachment.” This was precisely in line with the applicant’s entitlement under the Office Memorandum of October 14, 2015, as (at that time) a state party, according to the AAP application.
It was also noted that a notice of cancellation of the aforementioned allotment was overturned by an August 23, 2017, ruling issued by the Delhi High Court. The matter was brought to the attention of a bench consisting of Chief Justice of India (CIJ) DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, who were handling a case involving judicial infrastructure nationwide.
In its plea, which was submitted on Thursday, the AAP requested intervention in the case and stated that it deserved to be heard before the court issues any directives.
The application explained that the purpose of the allocation of office space for official party operations is to level the electoral playing field and is a crucial part of public funding for elections in India.
Specifically, the party claimed that AAP is entitled to two office spaces in Delhi—one for its national unit and another for its Delhi state unit. It did this by using the Policy Guidelines for Allotment of Land to Political Parties of 2012 released by the Land & Development Office (L&DO), Government of India.
There is no question that the applicant is “encroaching” on space that was lawfully awarded to it in 2015 and has been in its possession ever since. As of right now, the applicant has only been given office space (i.e., the subject premises) for its Delhi State Unit. The applicant has occupied the subject property for a considerable amount of time prior to it being designated for the expansion of the Rouse Avenue Court Complex, according to the AAP application.
The party did, however, acknowledge that it understands the need for judicial infrastructure to ensure the welfare of Delhi’s inhabitants and that moving its state unit office to a suitable alternative location is not something it is opposed to.
However, the parties contended that no explanation had been provided as to why the L&DO had not performed due diligence by looking into the land’s prior status and vacancy. The party said that despite its pleas in 2017, no action was taken in response to its requests for another location. The plea stated that if the AAP is given at least one of the two sites it is entitled to in the New Delhi Municipal Area, it is prepared to leave its current location on Rouse Avenue.
