The apex court noted the fact that the opinions of both the top law officers against the auctioning of the hotel was not placed before the Ministry of Home Affairs for consideration.
A bench of Justices Pinaki Ghose and R F Nariman also took note of the fact that there was also an internal opinion of the top office bearers of NDMC against the auctioning process.
During the hearing, the bench said that "the Attorney General and Solicitor General's opinion was not looked upon by MHA. You (NDMC) have not placed the opinions before the ministry concerned. We do not know what the ministry would have said if the opinions were placed before it".
It told Additional Solicitor General Sanjay Jain that NDMC has told the ministry that opinions of the AG and SG which have favoured extension of lease, are still awaited.
It asked Jain whether NDMC agrees to reconsider the decision of going ahead with the auctioning process.
To this, the ASG said, "No, it can't be done."
"Why are you not agreeing to reconsider the decision. It not a matter of right. Do you not want to be fair to the party who has been paying the rent constinously for 30 years," the bench said.
The company had earlier submitted that NDMC expert report
suggests that the council would "lose revenue" if the hotel was auctioned to other players.
It had also refused NDMC's prayer that the hotel should be restrained from taking any fresh bookings, saying, "It is very difficult to restrain fresh bookings for a running hotel. Everything will be decided when we hear the matter."
IHCL, which runs the five-star hotel in the national capital, had on November 8 last year approached the apex court against the Delhi High Court's order that cleared the decks for auctioning of the iconic property.
The high court had dismissed IHCL's plea saying the company has "no right" for renewal of the licence period and NDMC was "within its power" to secure maximum consideration for grant of licence for the property located at the prime location of 1, Man Singh Road in Lutyen's Delhi.
IHCL had moved the division bench of the high court against the September 5 last year judgement of a single judge who had not acceded to the firm's request for renewal of licence for a further period, saying it was not entitled for the extension.
NDMC had earlier said it was in the process of assessing the assets of the hotel in preparation for the much-delayed auction.
IHCL had earlier approached the single judge bench of the high court seeking a decree of permanent injunction restraining NDMC from interfering in any manner with the possession, right to operate, run and maintain the hotel premises.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
