Delhi High Court stays ruling on enforcing CM Arvind Kejriwal press conference promise on payment of rent

A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court on Monday stayed the July 22 ruling by which a single-Judge had held that a promise, assurance or representation given by Chief Minister of a State amounts to an enforceable promise that must be implemented. (Govt NCT of Delhi v. Najma and ors).A Bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh passed the order, which stated that the challenged judgment would be stayed until the matter would be heard next. .The Court was hearing an appeal preferred by the Delhi government, challenging Justice Prathiba Singh's July 22 order. Notice has also been issued in the appeal, returnable by November 29. .By the July 22 order, Justice Singh had held that the Delhi government is bound by the assurance given by Chief Minister Kejriwal in his press conference of March 29, 2020, in which he said that the Delhi government would pay rent on behalf of poor tenants, if any tenant is unable to pay rent.The single-judge had, therefore, ruled that the assurance/promise given by the Chief Minister is enforceable, both on the basis of the doctrines of promissory estoppel and legitimate expectations.Justice Singh had, therefore, ordered the Delhi government to take steps to frame a policy to carry out the assurance given by the CM and to give reasons if they decide not to implement the CM's proposal.An appeal was filed against the same before the Division Bench. .Senior Advocate Manish Vashisht appeared for the appellant today. The Court today orally queried whether the government was willing to give even a part of the amount promised. .The Court, however, eventually stayed the implementation and execution of the single-Judge order till the next date of hearing. .Advocate Gaurav Jain was present to protest the ex parte interim stay order as being unfair. He argued that there was no prima facie case or balance of convenience in favour of the appellant, nor would any irreparable loss be caused to give such a stay order in favour of the Delhi government..He added that the petitioners (respondents) were very poor and that the single-judge had only asked the Delhi government to frame a policy. Six weeks time was given for the same, which was extended to eight weeks, Advocate Jain recounted. ."It is very surprising that for such a small amount of rent, the Delhi government, which claims to have one of the highest budgets among States, they are refusing. There are six petitioners ... How hard it is to formulate a policy? They had given 6 weeks time (later extended by two more weeks) ... (there is) no policy - they are in contempt... This stay on that judgment should not be made. They should be asked to make that policy," he argued. .The Court, however, stood by its decision to stay the single-judge ruling. .In its revised order, the Court recorded that it has considered the transcript of the Chief Minister's Press Conference and other facts and circumstances to conclude that there is a prima facie case in favour of the appellant. The order added that the balance of convenience is also in favour of the appellant and that irreparable loss would be caused (if the judgment is not stayed)..The matter is expected to be taken up next on November 29. .[BREAKING] Promise by Chief Minister in press conference enforceable: Delhi High Court orders Kejriwal govt to pay rents for poor tenants