New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday extended the deadline for the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) to vacate its office premises at Delhi’s Rouse Avenue until June 15, 2024. This decision comes after the court recognized that the land which houses the AAP office has been allocated to the Delhi High Court for the expansion of its judicial infrastructure.
Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud, leading the bench, emphasized the need to expedite the utilization of the land for the district judiciary’s requirements, particularly in light of the upcoming general elections. Justices P B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra also formed part of the bench.
The court directed the AAP to approach the Land and Development Office for the allotment of alternative land for its offices. It underscored that the party lacked a “lawful right” to continue occupying the current premises.
Also Read: Supreme Court’s big judgment on immunity to lawmakers in bribery cases
Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, representing the AAP, highlighted the party’s national status, expressing dissatisfaction with the proposed relocation. Singhvi pointed out that while the AAP is one of the six recognized national parties, the suggested relocation of the AAP office to Badarpur was not commensurate with its stature compared to other parties.
Previously, the Supreme Court had instructed the Delhi government and the Registrar General of the Delhi High Court to convene a meeting to address the encroachment by the AAP on the land allotted to the high court at Rouse Avenue.
The decision to grant an extension underscores the complexities involved in reallocating space in the capital and balancing the needs of various institutions. The AAP now faces the task of finding suitable accommodations while the Delhi High Court gears up for its expansion plans.
‘You abuse your right’: Supreme Court raps Udhayanidhi Stalin
In another major news, the Supreme Court delivered a stern rebuke to Tamil Nadu Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin regarding his contentious remarks advocating for the “eradication” of Sanatana Dharma.
Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta, comprising the bench, questioned the minister’s decision to seek recourse in the apex court following his provocative statements, emphasizing that as a minister, he ought to comprehend the repercussions of his words. Read more…
Read all the World News, Business News, Sports News, Entertainment News, Business News and Opinion here. Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.
