Deliver on promise, pay rents on behalf of in-red tenants, directs High Court

A public promise or assurance given by a Chief Minister amounts to an enforceable promise and the same has to be implemented by the Government. Pronouncing this, the Delhi High Court on Thursday ordered that Delhi Government is bound by the assurance given by Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal in his Press conference of March 29, 2020, in which he said the State  Government would pay rents on behalf of poor tenants if any tenant is unable to pay rent.

“This court is of the opinion that the promise/assurance/representation given by the CM clearly amounts to an enforceable promise, the implementation of which ought to be considered by the Government. Good governance requires that promises made to citizens, by those who govern, are not broken, without valid and justifiable reasons,” said Justice Prathiba M Singh.

The court asked the Delhi Government to take steps to frame a policy to carry out the assurance given by the CM.

The Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) would, having regard to the statement made by the CM on March 29, 2020, to landlords and tenants, take a decision as to the implementation of the same within a period of 6 week, the Court said.

The decision would be taken, bearing in mind the larger interest of the persons to whom the benefits were intended to be extended in the said statement, as well as other overriding public interest concerns, it added.

The judgment was passed on a plea by petitioners, which included daily wage labourers who claimed to be tenants unable to pay their rents after COVID-19 economic slowdown. The petitioners placed reliance on the press conference held by Kejriwal on March 29, 2020.

Advocate Gaurav Jain appearing for the petitioners contended that when such a promise/assurance is given by the CM who is the Government’s highest functionary, citizens are entitled to seek enforcement of such promises on the basis of the doctrine of legitimate expectation. Jain argued that Right to Shelter is a fundamental right and the Government, having made a clear representation to the citizens, would be bound by the said representation.

Senior counsel Rahul Mehra, representing the Delhi Government, argued that the doctrine of legitimate expectation can only be based on actual Governmental policy or a Governmental notification or an executive decision, and not on a mere political statement.

He contended that unless and until there is an actual Governmental policy which has been formally issued, a promise cannot be the mere basis of a claim based on the doctrine of legitimate expectation.

“On behalf of the citizens, there would obviously be a reasonable expectation, that an assurance or a promise made by a senior Constitutional functionary, not less than the CM himself, would be give effect to. It cannot be reasonably said that no tenant or landlord would have believed the CM,” the court opined.

“Once the CM had made a solemn assurance, there was a duty cast on the GNCTD to take a stand as to whether to enforce the said promise or not, and if so on what grounds or on the basis of what reasons,” the judgment said.

A statement given in a consciously held Press conference, in the background of the lockdown announced due to the pandemic and the mass exodus of migrant labourers, cannot be simply overlooked, the court added.

“The statements made by persons in power are trusted by the public who repose faith and believe in the same. Thus, ‘puffing’ which may be permissible in commercial advertising, ought not to be recognisable and permissible in governance,” the court ruled.