Bungalow for Kejriwal case: Delhi HC asks Centre for records of GPRA allotments

The developments came after the Centre’s counsel, Amit Tiwari, submitted that although the Union housing ministry exercised discretion in allotting some Type-7 bungalows and all Type-8 bungalows

New Delhi

Justice Sachin Datta issued the direction while dealing with the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP)’s petition seeking allotment of a residence to its chief, Arvind Kejriwal, in Delhi. (Representative photo)

The Delhi High Court on Thursday directed the Centre to submit records of past allotments of Type-7 and Type-8 accommodations from the General Pool of Residential Accommodation (GPRA), emphasising that the process must be transparent and not based solely on the executive’s arbitrary discretion.

Justice Sachin Datta issued the direction while dealing with the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP)’s petition seeking allotment of a residence to its chief, Arvind Kejriwal, in Delhi.

The developments came after the Centre’s counsel, Amit Tiwari, submitted that although the Union housing ministry exercised discretion in allotting some Type-7 bungalows and all Type-8 bungalows, these decisions were made in accordance with executive orders and official memoranda.

The Centre’s counsel explained that some Type-7 bungalows are allotted through bidding, while others, along with Type-8 bungalows, were allocated to central government employees based on their seniority.

On the allotment of a house to Arvind Kejriwal, Tiwari said that the rules allow for the allotment of a bungalow to the president of a nationally recognised political party, but do not specify the type of accommodation, and the allotment depends on availability. He further informed the court that the bungalow at 35 Lodhi Estate, which had been vacated, was allotted to a minister of state on July 24.

Taking the contention into account, the court directed the Centre’s counsel to submit records detailing the policy governing the allotment of houses from the GPRA, along with records of past allotments. Additionally, the court instructed the director and joint secretary of the Directorate of Estates to join the proceedings virtually, on the next hearing date, September 25.

“I’m not on this (Kejriwal’s case specifically). I’m on the broader issue. There has to be a transparent mechanism. It can’t be as per the pure will of the executive.... Produce the policy, “ the bench said to Tiwari.

It added, “…I want to know in what manner, have previous allotments been made. I need to see how it has worked out, how priority has been taken into account... What is the sequencing in that process?”

In its petition, the AAP had asserted that Kejriwal—as per the guidelines for allotment of accommodation from the general pool to political parties—was entitled to a government residence in Delhi, being the president of a recognised national party. It went on to add that Kejriwal, after stepping down as chief minister, had vacated his official residence at 6, Flagstaff Road on October 4, 2024, and had been staying at the official residence of another party member near Mandi House.

On Tuesday, the high court had criticised the Centre for its evasive stance on allotting a residence in the capital to Kejriwal, observing that its approach resembled a “free-for-all” system and it could not selectively decide as to who gets a house. AAP’s lawyer, Rahul Mehra, had previously informed the court that although Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma had initially sought time to seek instructions regarding the party’s proposal to allot the bungalow at 35 Lodhi Estate (that was vacated by Bahujan Samaj Party supremo Mayawati in May this year) to Arvind Kejriwal, the Centre’s lawyer later repeatedly sought passovers, citing ASG’s unavailability.

Mehra further pointed out that during the two hearings held on September 4 and 12, though the Centre continued to delay the matter, it went ahead and allotted the same property—35 Lodhi Estate—to someone else.