HC suspends order asking Delhi government to decide to give rent to poor people during COVID


HC suspends order asking Delhi government to decide to give rent to poor people during COVID


1970-01-01T05: 30: 00 + 0530

(Eds: Repeat with a minor modification and add paragraph 3)

New Delhi, Sep 27 (PTI) The Delhi High Court on Monday suspended an order directing the AAP government to decide and formulate policy on the implementation of Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s announcement that if a poor tenant was unable to pay his rent during the COVID-19 pandemic, the state would pay him.

A bench of Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh issued an opinion on the Delhi government’s appeal against the order issued by a single judge, who also held that a chief minister’s promise to citizens was binding in nature.

The notice was issued to the petitioners – the daily bets and the workers – on whose request the Single Judge had issued the order which was challenged by the Delhi government.

The bench said irreparable loss would be caused to the appellant if a stay order was not passed.

“There is a prima facie case in favor of the appellant. The balance of convenience is in favor of the appellant and irreparable loss will be caused. We are suspending the operation, implementation and enforcement of the Single Judge’s order until the next hearing date, ”said the panel which returned the case for a new hearing on November 29.

Senior lawyer Manish Vashisht, representing the government of Delhi, asserted that in the context of the outbreak of the pandemic, a “strong appeal” was made by the chief minister to the general public not to force tenants to pay a rent, however, the same was “considered” as “some kind of promise” by the single judge.

“In my opinion, there was no promise at all. We only said to follow the Prime Minister’s statement. We told landlords (who) don’t force tenants to pay rent… and even if to some extent the poor can’t afford to pay, the government will look into it, ”he said. declared.

Taking note of his submission, the judiciary said “So you don’t intend to make the payment?” Even five percent payment.

The senior lawyer responded by saying “only if the situation required it”.

Lawyer Gaurav Jain, representing the petitioners – the daily bets and workers who sought to uphold the promise before the single judge, opposed the granting of any stay order.

He said his clients had no way of paying the rent.

In its appeal, the Delhi government argued that to expect a government “to implement a truncated sentence from the press conference held by the Honorable CM, devoid of context and in the face of developments which demonstrate that the contingency for which the insurance was made has never really transpired is grossly unfair ”.

“The facts and circumstances surrounding the truncated statement of the Honorable CM on 03/29/2020 demonstrate that the manner in which the applicants would have acted is unreasonable as no blind and unconditional assurance for the payment of rent by the GNCTD during the lockdown was made by him, ”the plea said.

On July 22 this year, Judge Prathiba M Singh ruled that a Chief Minister’s promise to citizens was enforceable and ordered the AAP government to decide within six weeks of Arvind Kejriwal’s announcement. that the state would pay rent on behalf of a poor tenant who is unable to do so due to COVID19.

The judge ruled that in the context of a commitment made by the Chief Minister, lack of decision-making or indecision was against the law.

“A statement made at a consciously held press conference, in the context of the lockdown announced due to the pandemic and the mass exodus of migrant workers, cannot simply be ignored. Good governance requires the government to pronounce on the assurance given by the CM, and inaction on this subject cannot be the answer, ”the single judge declared in an 89-page verdict.

The judge had stated that in this case the insurance was not a “political promise”, as had been requested, since it had not been made in the context of a campaign rally, but it was was the statement of the Chief Minister of Delhi.

“The statement was not made by a government official at a lower level in the hierarchy, who might be devoid of such knowledge. The CM is expected to have had said knowledge and exercise his authority to give effect to his promise / assurance, ”the court said, adding that a citizen would believe the CM spoke on behalf of his government while making the promise.

On September 10, Judge Prathiba M Singh gave the Delhi government two more weeks to decide on the implementation of the insurance. PTI ADS





Disclaimer: – This story has not been edited by Outlook staff and is auto-generated from news agency feeds. Source: PTI


About Author

Leave A Reply