Friday, 5 October 2018

PRESS-RELEASE: Delhi High Court on Thursday afternoon 4 October, 2018 reserved its judgement in the case challenging the constitutional validity of archaic Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958


The final arguments on the petition challenging the constitutional validity of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (DRC Act) in re:

Writ Petition (Civil) no. 516 of 2010
titled
Shobha Aggarwal & others v. Union of India & Another

were concluded on 4 October, 2018 before a division bench comprising of Justice Ravindra Bhat and Justice A. K. Chawla of the Delhi High Court. The petitioners in the case had concluded their opening arguments on 30 July, 2018. The arguments were addressed by lead petitioner-in-person Ms. Shobha Aggarwal (also an advocate) assisted by Mr. Pranav Jain, advocate. On 4 October, 2018 arguments on behalf of the Union of India were addressed by Mr. Akshay Makhija, Standing Counsel for the Central Government. The counsel for tenants’ associations – which had been allowed to intervene in the case – also placed their arguments before the court. A brief rebuttal was done by the lead petitioner, Shobha Aggarwal.

The bench during the course of the hearing made the following remarks:

“At one point they were landlords. Now they are only lords. Lands are with you (tenants).”

“It is a crime to own property then.”

The lead petition was filed in 2010 by a group of women property owners (Shobha Aggarwal, Suman Jain, Seema Khandelwal). The case was necessitated as hundreds of thousands of property owners in Delhi are being paid pittance as rent under the archaic law. Successive governments at the Centre in the last 25 years have failed to implement their own policy to reform the rent control law under pressure from tenant/trader lobby of old markets in Delhi. The DRC Act, 1958 has resulted in proliferation of dangerous buildings and ruination of the city of Delhi; also the poor & needy have been further marginalized and condemned to stay in slums.

The case is now reserved for judgement.

(Shobha Aggarwal)
Petitioner no. 1-in-person (lead petitioner)

No comments:

Post a Comment