AJL Plea against order to vacate heraled house dismissed by HC
NEWDELHI:THE Delhi high court on Friday dismissed a petition by the Associated Journals Limited (AJL) that challenged an eviction order by the central government, and ordered the publisher of Congress mouthpiece National Herald to vacate its premises in central Delhi within two weeks.
The HC rejected AJL’S allegation that the Centre’s move to evict it from the Herald House at Delhi’s ITO was a covert measure to erase legacy of Jawaharlal Nehru, who founded National Herald newspaper in 1938. The Centre and Land and Development Office said in eviction order that no press was functioning at the premises for at least 10 years and that it was being used only for commercial purposes in violation of the lease deed. Justice Sunil Gaur said “allegations of mala fide [against the Centre] are preposterous” and granted AJL two weeks to vacate Herald House, failing which the L&DO would be free to initiate proceedings under the Public Premises Act, 1971. The court said that the showcause notice by the Centre “adheres to the principles of natural justice”. It said that an inspection of the said building revealed that “no press activity” was being carried out. The singlejudge bench also said that the manner in which a company named Young Indian (YI) acquired 99% of the shares of AJL was “questionable”. Congress president Rahul Gandhi and his mother Sonia Gandhi are majority shareholders in YI.
“No instances have been provided by petitioners in the writ petition in support of the serious allegations of mala fide levelled against the ruling dispensation. It has not been shown as to how impugned order is vitiated by mala fide or what is the bias. It is not spelt out as to what is oblique motive in passing of impugned order. One fails to understand as to how ruling dispensation has in any way erased, effaced or defamed Pt Nehru,” court said. It added that YI had “hijacked” AJL. “The ‘subject premises’ was leased out to legendary AJL for its publication, but the dominant purpose is now practically lost. Court is constrained to observe that major portion of ‘subject premises’ has been rented out and petitioners’ newspaper, which was to be housed originally in basement and ground floor, has now been shifted on top floor with hardly any ‘press activity’,” court said.