Center of Applied Politics v. Government of India & Anr

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, impugning the orders dated 12.06.2017 and 23.06.2017 issued by the Deputy Land & Development Officer (respondent no. 2 – hereafter ‘L&DO’), wherein the perpetual deed of lease deed dated 02.07.1977 executed in favour of the petitioner in respect of a plot of land measuring 2000 Sq. Yds located at I.P Estate (hereafter ‘the land in question’), was cancelled and the petitioner was directed to hand over possession of the same to the concerned authorities. The aforesaid orders are, hereafter, collectively referred to as the impugned orders.

2. The impugned orders were passed by L&DO on the ground that 2019:DHC:3709 petitioner had failed and neglected to construct a building on the land in question and use the same for the purpose for which the said land was allotted. The L&DO also found that there was unauthorized construction on the land in question and there were complaints of attempts made to usurp the same by squatters/miscreants for carrying on the work of a political party. The impugned order dated 12.06.2017 also indicates that show cause notices were issued and a notice was also pasted on site but no response was received.

3. Mr V.P. Singh, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner has assailed the impugned order on two fronts. First, he states that the same have been passed without affording the petitioner an opportunity to be heard. He contends that the show cause notices, as referred to in the impugned order dated 12.06.2017, were not served on the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner had no opportunity to respond to the same.

4. Second, he submits that the unauthorized construction raised at site did not warrant cancellation of the allotment of the plot in question. He submits that the said breaches could be compounded and the unauthorized construction could be regularized. He submitted that L&DO had, in several cases, regularized the breaches upon payment of penalty and the same treatment ought to be afforded to the petitioner as well. He contended that the impugned orders were discriminatory and therefore, were liable to the set aside.

5. The petitioner is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The petitioner applied to the respondents for the allotment of land. On 21.04.1971, L&DO allotted 2000 sq. yards of land described as Narendra Niketan, I.P. Estate, New Delhi (the land in question) to the petitioner. An ‘Agreement for Lease’ dated 02.07.1977 (hereafter ‘the Agreement for Lease’) was executed in favour of the petitioner and possession of the land in question was handed over to the petitioner on 25.08.1977.

6. The Agreement for Lease expressly stipulated that within a period of twenty-four calendar months from the date of handing over of possession of the land in question, the petitioner would at its own expense, erect an office building and five single seated rooms for visiting scholars from India and abroad, in conformity with the architectural surroundings in the area. The said buildings were required to be constructed in accordance with the approved plans. The manner in which the buildings were to be constructed was set out in some detail in the said Agreement for Lease.

7. Admittedly, the said building has not been constructed even after expiry of more than four decades from the date of handing over of possession of the land in question. Thus, indisputably, the petitioner society has failed to comply with his obligation under the Agreement for Lease.

8. At this stage, it is also relevant to note that the land in question was granted to the petitioner to further its objects. The Memorandum of Association of the petitioner indicates that it was formed, essentially, to undertake and promote studies (both theoretical as well as practical) in various fields including political process/administration and diplomacy. The object clause of the Memorandum of Association of the petitioner is set out below:-

“II. The objects for which the Society is formed are;i). to study concepts, theories and symbols (a). Functioning in the political process/administration/diplomacy; and (b). used in inquiry into political process/administration/diplomacy. ii). To undertake basic research and training in the field of politics and diplomacy directly as well as through its affiliated Centres and Universities; iii). To sponsor Centres in those fields of study that concern India directly or indirectly; iv). To build up a body of knowledge on factors with a similar background that shape the directions and decisions in the field; v). To extend gradually its work to other areas for purposes of useful comparisons and realistic appraisals of politics and programmes pursued by India and other Nations; vi). To undertake, promote and encourage fundamental and applied research and coordinate studies of developing countries with a view to facilitating the evolution of appropriate concepts in the various problems confronting the developing countries; vii). To undertake the Research Projects on areas studies; viii). To serve as a clearing house of information and build up a body of knowledge relating to the politics of change in the developing countries and to establish and maintain libraries therefore; ix). To constitute or cause to be constituted Regional/local branches at convenient centres in India or abroad to promote the objects of the Centre. x). To publish books, monographs, periodicals, journals and other literature for the furtherance of the Centre's objectives; xi). To arrange conferences, seminars and other meetings necessary for the purpose; xii). To co-operate, federate, associate or otherwise establish contacts with other organizations with similar pursuits in India or abroad; xiii). To establish and maintain libraries and information services to facilitate the study of politics and diplomacy and spreading information in regard thereto; xiv). To establish, for the management and administration of all the properties, money's assets and activities of the Centre by the Governing Body consisting of the founder members plus three more by election/cooption from the ordinary members in due course of time; xv). To maintain residential accommodation with cultural and educational amenities for the members of the Centre coming to participate in the activities of the Centre and of other bodies with cognate objectives, as well as non-members specially invited to participate in the activities of the Centre; xvi). To issue appeals and applications and money and funds in furtherance of the said objects and to accept gifts, donations and subscriptions of cash and securities and of any property either movable or immovable; xvii). To invest and deal with funds and moneys of the Centre; xviii).To acquire, purchase or otherwise own or take on lease or hire in the State of Delhi or outside, temporarily or permanently, any movable or immovable property necessary or convenient for the furtherance of the objects of the Centre; xix). To sell, mortgage, lease, exchange and otherwise transfer or dispose of all or any property, movable or immovable of the Centre for the furtherance of objects of the Centre; xx). To construct, maintain, alter, improve or develop any buildings or works necessary or convenient for the purposes of the Centre; xxi). To undertake and accept the management of any endowment or trust fund or donation; xxii). To establish a provident fund for the benefit of the employees of the Centre; xxiii) To offer prizes and to grant scholarships and stipends in furtherance of the objects of the Centre, and xxiv) To do all such other lawful things as are conductive or incidental to the attainment of the above objects.”

9. Indisputably, the land in question was allotted to the petitioner for furthering its objects. It was envisaged that rooms would be constructed for visiting scholars from India and abroad for the purpose of studies, as contemplated within the objects of the petitioner society. It is obvious that even after four decades, the said purpose remains unfulfilled and the land in question has not been used for the purposes for which it was allotted.

10. It is also apparent from the photographs annexed with the instant petition that temporary barrack like structures have been constructed on the land in question. One of the photographs indicates that clothes have been put out to dry outside one of the units. Two other photographs indicate that a photograph of a former Prime Minister of this country has been prominently displayed on the land in question, indicating that the premises are connected with the political party to which he belonged [Samajwadi Janta Party(R)]. The respondents also assert that they had received complaints that the unauthorized construction raised on the land in question was being used for the work of a political party and the inspections had revealed that the complaint was correct.

11. The counter affidavit filed on behalf of the L&DO indicates that several inspections had taken place from time to time, which had clearly established that unauthorized construction has been raised on the land in question. Several notices in this regard were issued to the petitioner. Copies of the said notices/letters have been annexed with the counter affidavit.

12. In addition to the above, the respondents have also received a complaint which indicate that there is a dispute as to the management of the petitioner society. It appears that there are two sets of persons who are claiming to be the governing body of the petitioner society. Copies of the complaints, received by the respondents in this regard, have been produced along with the counter affidavit.

13. Mr V.P. Singh, learned senior counsel had contended that the petitioner had not been issued any show cause notice before passing of the impugned orders and the petitioner had no opportunity to respond to the allegations. He further contended that the show cause notices dated 24.03.2017 and 17.05.2017, which were mentioned in the impugned order dated 12.06.2017, were not received by the petitioner. The aforesaid contention is unmerited. The respondents have affirmed that the notices were dispatched to the petitioner. It has also affirmed that one of the show cause notices was pasted at the site. It is apparent that the notices were not responded to as there are now two sets of persons who are claiming to be constituting the Governing Body of the petitioner society. Notwithstanding the above, this Court is also of the view that the issue regarding non-receipt of show cause is not relevant since the allegations made therein cannot be disputed. There is no dispute that the petitioner has failed to comply with the conditions of the Agreement for Lease. It has not constructed the buildings as required. There is also no material on record to indicate that the land in question was used for the purposes for which it was allotted.

14. Mr Singh was pointedly asked as to whether there is any rudimentary material to even remotely indicate that the objects of the petitioner society are being pursued; whether the petitioner society has any faculty engaged in academic exercise or further research; and whether the petitioner society has published any paper or book of any academic significance.