Delhi HC reserves verdict in plea against AJL’s eviction from Herald House

The Delhi High Court today reserved its verdict in a petition moved by the owner of National Herald, Associated Journals Ltd (AJL), against a Central government order asking it to vacate the Herald House after the determination of a perpetual lease..The verdict was reserved by Justice Sunil Gaur after hearing the counsel appearing for AJL and the Centre..Solicitor General Tushar Mehta refuted AJL’s claim that the notice was politically motivated by stating that there are no specific pleadings on mala fides except a mere allegation that the “Centre is trying to destroy the Nehruvian legacy“..He further asserted that AJL’s conduct was in violation of the lease agreement, and hence the lease was rightly determined. He stressed upon the fact that Hearld House was being used by AJL for purposes other than ‘running a Press’, and that National Herald was revived by AJL only after the Centre sent a notice for inspection of the property in September 2016..He further contended that the sale of AJL to Young Indian was done to “scrupulously transfer the interest in Herald House to the new owners of Young India“..In his rejoinder submissions, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi stated that AJL was not obligated to physically print newspapers to satisfy the lease mandate of “running a Press”. He informed the Court that it was a popular practice by media houses to “publish the newspaper” from one site, while “printing the newspaper” from another. AJL, he stated, was running its printing press from a site in Noida as well as Herald House..After hearing the parties, the Court reserved its judgment..AJL has challenged the “legality, validity, and reasonableness” of an order passed by the Land and Development Officer, Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs on October 30, 2018, directing it to vacate Herald House by November 15..The Centre had cancelled the lease on the ground that the said premises was being used only for commercial purposes in violation of Clause III (7) of the Lease Deed, and that no Press has been functioning in the said premises for last at least 10 years..In the petition filed through Advocate Priyansha Indra Sharma, it is claimed that the determination of the “Perpetual Lease” dated January 10, 1967, executed between AJL and the Central government with regards to the said premises is “based on frivolous, malicious, political, arbitrary grounds, none of which are contemplated under the Lease Deed and seeks to initiate illegal and impermissible action under The Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971.”.The order passed by the Land and Development Officer is therefore in violation of Article 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India, the petition states..During the previous hearing, AJL had argued that the notice was actuated by political motives, and that it was a patent case of non-application of mind..SG Mehta had assured the Court that the government would not dispossess AJL, after the Court asked it to maintain status quo.