National Herald building case: Breather for AJL as HC asks for status quo till Nov 22

The publisher of the National Herald newspaper, which was ordered by the Centre to vacate its premises here by November 15, got a last minute breather Thursday with the Delhi High Court directing status quo till November 22.

Associated Journals Ltd (AJL), the publisher of the newspaper, approached the high court on November 12 challenging the October 30 order of the Urban Development Ministry, ending its 56-year-old lease and asking it to vacate the premises at the press enclave in ITO.

In its petition, the AJL alleged that the proceedings by the Urban Development ministry were being initiated for the purposes of "scuttling the voices of dissent" and the voice of the largest opposition party in the country, a reference to the Congress.

Without naming the BJP, the AJL further alleged that the order issued under pressure and directives from the ruling party at the Centre is vitiated by malafides, bias and had "oblique political motives".

"It is evident that there are extraneous factors in the decision-making process and the entire exercise of passing the impugned order is only a political witch hunt aimed at dismantling and destroying the voice of dissent and opposition parties," the petition contended.

When the matter came up for hearing in the high court, the central government gave an oral assurance it will maintain status quo till November 22.

The assurance was given before Justice Sunil Gaur by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta after the court said if the government wanted the matter to be heard on another date "then maintain status quo till then".

Mehta told the court he will not be able to argue post lunch as he has to be in the Supreme Court for another matter and urged the high court to hear the matter on another date.

Senior advocate Abhishek M Singhvi, appearing for AJL, told the court that status quo ought to mean no taking over of possession as well as no initiation of proceedings under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971.

To this, the court said "obviously" and added, "when the matter is sub-judiced, then that much courtesy they need to show to the court".

The Land and Development Office (L&DO), which comes under the Urban Development Ministry, had ended the lease -- entered into with AJL on August 2, 1962 and made perpetual on January 10, 1967 -- asking the company to hand over the possession by November 15.

The L&DO's order also said that failure to hand over possession would lead to initiation of proceedings under the Public Premises Act.

During the proceedings, Singhvi told the judge that two officials of L&DO have entered the National Herald premises which ought not to have been done.

This claim was refuted by Mehta and the court asked Singhvi to ask his clients to verify the submission.

After a few minutes, Singhvi on instructions told the court that he has photographs of the two officials and said that their names were -- Gopal Rastogi and K R Rana.

While Mehta said the matter would be looked into, the court said, "They (L&DO) cannot take possession like this. They have to proceed under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971".

It was also argued on behalf of AJL that the digital versions of English newspaper 'National Herald', Hindi's 'Navjivan' and Urdu's 'Qaumi Awaz' have commenced since 2016-17.

The weekly newspaper 'National Herald on Sunday' resumed on September 24 last year and the place of publication was the ITO premises, Singhvi said, adding that the Hindi weekly newspaper 'Sunday Navjivan' was also being published since October this year from the same premises.

"The necessary licences and authorisations for the purposes of publication were also placed on record, in particular, the necessary licenses have been obtained by the petitioner (AJL)," the petition said.

Singhvi said the first ground for eviction indicated in the L&DO order was that no press was running in the premises given on lease to AJL in 1962.

He said this ground was raised for the first time in a June 18, 2018 show cause notice issued on the basis of an inspection carried out on April 9, 2018 and it was not mentioned in the earlier notice of 2016.

"The requirement of running a press cannot mean that all press and printing related activities have to necessarily be conducted at the same premises, that is, demised premises.

"The imperatives of prudent commercial business operations may necessitate that the company utilise the infrastructure or the premises at some other place as a supplement to their operations in the present premises," he said.

Singhvi further said that a new printing press has been bought and installed.

With regard to the allegation of transfer of the premises to Young Indian(YI), when it became a shareholder of AJL by taking over its debt, the senior lawyer said that change in shareholding does not lead to transfer of property.

He further argued there was no clause in the agreement, which was converted into a perpetual lease on January 10, 1967, that L&DO's permission was required for change in shareholding and this requirement cannot be incorporated by interpretation.

He said AJL continues to be the owner of the premises and YI was only the 98 per cent shareholder of the company.

Singhvi said these two grounds were raised in the show-cause notice of June 18, 2018, in addition to two others.