The Supreme Court of India.
Credit: PTI File Photo
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday extended the time granted to the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) to vacate the office premises allotted to it here, from June 15, 2024 till August 10, 2024, on the party's undertaking that this opportunity would be the last one in this regard.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta rejected a contention by the applicant party that the vacating of premises should be subject to allotment of an alternative office space to the national political party.
The applicant sought a modification of the previous order of March 4, 2024 by the apex court to vacate the AAP office at Rouse Avenue here to be utilised for the expansion of Delhi courts.
Advocate K Parameshwar, appearing for the Delhi High Court, which exercised administrative control over the Delhi courts, claimed that the space had been allotted to it since 2020.
"We have not got possession of the space for the last four years. If the court is extending the time, it should be the last opportunity, we don't want to suffer due to tussle between the applicant party and the Union government," he said.
He pointed out that on March 4, 2024, the apex court had told the AAP to vacate the premises in question by June 15, 2024.
"Since the premises in question has already been allotted to Delhi High Court, the expansion of the Delhi's Rouse Avenue is stultified due to it. This is an application for modification seeking extension of time. Considering the facts the circumstances of the matter and as a last opportunity, we extend the time to vacate the premises till August 10, 2024 subject to undertaking before the registry," the bench said.
On June 5, the Delhi High Court had rejected a plea by the AAP to order the Union government to allow the national party to use a housing unit, presently in occupation of a Delhi minister, as its office on a temporary basis.
Justice Subramonium Prasad, however, had directed the Union government to consider the request of the party within six weeks, saying the fact that the petitioner is a national political party cannot be overlooked.
The court had also asked the Centre to take a decision by passing a detailed order as to why even one housing unit from the general pool cannot be allotted to it when all other political parties have got similar accommodation for this purpose.