‘Calculated clandestine design to transfer the ownership of AJL to Young India’: Centre opposes AJL’s appeal against its eviction from Herald House

Strongly opposing Associated Journals Ltd’s (AJL) appeal against the order upholding its eviction from Herald House, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta today argued before the Delhi High Court that the lease for the premises was rightly determined after the ownership of AJL was “clandestinely” transferred to Young India in 2011..AJL is the owner of National Herald and Young India, controlled by Congress President Rahul Gandhi and leader Sonia Gandhi..Arguing that the motive behind the transfer was to assign the “lucrative interest” in Herald House to Young India, Mehta stated,.“There was a calculated, clandestine design to transfer the ownership of AJL to Young India.”.The submissions were made before a Division Bench of Chief Justice Rajendra Menon and Justice V Kameswar Rao. The Bench was hearing AJL’s appeal against an order of a Single Judge Bench which upheld a October 30, 2018 decision of the Land and Estate Officer, Government of India directing it to vacate Herald House by November 15, 2018..SG Mehta further justified the eviction order on the ground that the Herald House premises was being used by AJL only for the purpose of collecting rent from the sub-lessees, and not from the “bona fide purpose” of running a press from it..“(We) are dealing with a valuable property…The rent runs in crores…The purpose (of running a press) was stopped for years altogether“, he said..In its appeal filed through Advocate Priyansha Indra Sharma, AJL contended that the order of the Single Judge which dismissed its petition in limine, displayed “inexplicable haste“, without even calling for a written reply/affidavit from the Centre..It disputes the Single Judge’s observation that the transfer of AJL’s shares to Young India resulted in transfer of interest in the said premises to a third party, which occasions the determination of the lease..Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi appearing for AJL today submitted that four conditions were provided for under which the lease could be determined – namely, transfer of interest in the premise by sale, mortgage, gift, or otherwise. He argued that the term “otherwise” could not be interpreted to mean sale of the shares..Stating that the lessee in terms of the lease deed was still AJL, Singhvi argued,.“The interest was not transferred in the widest meaning of the phrase…Change of shareholding pattern cannot amount to transfer“..AJL further contended that its lease deed with the government did not contain any provision with regard to the quantum of circulation of AJL’s newspaper, National Herald, or its editorial policies for determining the continuation of the lease agreement..“The lease deed does not contain any provision for application of the ‘dominant purpose’ test. This test is a creation of the impugned order and is wholly inapplicable to the facts of the present case, especially based on the following submissions“, the petition reads..It has also alleged that the Single Judge Bench “failed to return any findings” on the elaborate submissions made by AJL with respect to the non-applicability of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 to the instant case..AJL therefore prays that the impugned order is patently baseless and deserves to be quashed..In December last year, Justice Sunil Gaur had upheld the Central government order directing AJL to vacate Herald House. The Court granted two weeks’ time to AJL to vacate the building, failing which action under Public Premises Act could be initiated..The Court had observed that “the dominant purpose” for which Herald House was leased out to petitioners, i.e. running National Herald newspaper, no longer existed, hence the determination of the lease was justified..The matter will next be heard on February 1.