Delhi High Court seeks Central government's reply to AAP's plea for land in Delhi to build party office

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday issued notice to the Central government on a plea filed by Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) seeking suitable land in the national capital to construct its national and Delhi state unit party offices..AAP moved the Court seeking directions to the Central government to ensure that the land allotted is ‘preferably in centrally located areas in New Delhi and free from encumbrances and encroachments so that construction of party office can commence immediately.Justice Subramonium Prasad heard the matter and directed the Central government as well as Land and Development officer, Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs to reply to the petition in six weeks.The case will be considered next on April 23, 2024..AAP argued that given its national party status, it is entitled to a total area of 1,000 square metres for construction of the offices for its national and state units.“The Memorandum dated 13.07.2006 clearly prescribes allotment of land up to 500 square meters to all National parties having up to 15 Members of Parliament in both Houses. Further, it also provides for an additional allocation of land up to 500 square meters for Delhi state units where the National Party has representation in the Delhi State legislature,” the plea said.It contended that because the Central government has allocated land to other political parties for construction of office premises, it is incumbent upon them to ensure that similar allotment is made in favour of AAP as well.“The National People’s Party, which was recognised as a National Party as recently as in 2019 with one member each in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, was also allotted land at North Avenue, New Delhi for construction of its National Party Office. Other National Parties also currently have offices on land allotted in central locations including Deen Dayal Upadhyay Marg, Akbar Road etc.”.AAP argued that the government’s refusal to allot land to Delhi’s ruling party even six months after its recognition as a National Party, was not only arbitrary but also discriminatory.“Such refusal is all the more egregious as the Petitioner is a party in opposition and hence, it is incumbent on the respondents to enable the full exercise of democratic freedoms by those in opposition instead of misusing their power to curtail such rights. The refusal to allot land has placed the party at great disadvantage in comparison to other National Parties and thus, violates the very ethos of a democratic parliamentary system, preventing the party from functioning properly in the absence of proper office premises,” it was contended.