The Delhi High Court has pulled up the Centre over its handling of a residential accommodation request for Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) national convenor and former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, stating that allotment of government bungalows cannot be based on “pure whims.” The court’s remarks came during a hearing on September 18, 2025, in response to a petition filed by AAP seeking a centrally located residence for Kejriwal under the General Pool Residential Accommodation (GPRA) guidelines.
Justice Sachin Datta, presiding over the matter, emphasized the need for a clear and discernible policy governing such allotments. The court directed the Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs and the Directorate of Estates to submit an affidavit detailing the current policy framework, past allotments, and the manner in which priority is assessed.
Key Observations by Delhi High Court
| Statement | Context |
|---|---|
| “There has to be a transparent mechanism.” | On the need for a structured allotment process |
| “It cannot be purely on your whims.” | Criticism of arbitrary decision-making |
| “I want to know the manner of assessing priority.” | On how allotments are sequenced |
| “I’m concerned with the larger issue.” | On discretion in allotment beyond Kejriwal’s case |
The court’s comments reflect broader concerns about the lack of transparency in the allocation of government accommodations.
Timeline of Events in the Bungalow Allotment Case
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| May 2025 | BSP chief Mayawati vacates 35 Lodhi Estate bungalow |
| July 24, 2025 | Bungalow allotted to Union MoS for Finance Pankaj Chaudhary |
| September 4 & 12, 2025 | Centre seeks time to respond to AAP’s proposal |
| September 16, 2025 | Court criticizes Centre’s delay, calls it “free system for all” |
| September 18, 2025 | Court demands policy records and past allotment data |
| September 25, 2025 | Next hearing scheduled; officials to appear virtually |
The court has asked for clarity on the rules and procedures that govern such high-level residential allotments.
AAP’s Petition and Legal Grounds
| Claim | Details |
|---|---|
| Eligibility | Kejriwal is president of a nationally recognized party |
| Pre-conditions | Does not own or occupy any government residence |
| Requested Property | Type VII bungalow at 35 Lodhi Estate |
| Legal Basis | Rule 26(iii) of 2014 Office Memorandum by Housing Ministry |
Senior advocate Rahul Mehra, representing AAP, argued that all conditions for allotment were met and that the party had formally proposed the bungalow before it was reassigned.
Centre’s Response and Allotment Status
| Property | Status |
|---|---|
| 35 Lodhi Estate | Vacated by Mayawati in May 2025 |
| Proposed by AAP | For Kejriwal’s residence |
| Allotted to | Pankaj Chaudhary on July 24, 2025 |
| Centre’s Stand | Allotment made as per executive discretion and availability |
The Centre has maintained that the allotment was made in accordance with existing procedures, though it has yet to produce the full policy documentation.
GPRA Allotment Policy: What the Court Wants to Know
| Query | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Is there a formal procedure? | Court seeks written policy |
| How is priority determined? | Based on seniority, position, or discretion? |
| What is the sequence of allotments? | Court wants records of past decisions |
| Are rules applied uniformly? | Concern over selective allotments |
Justice Datta has asked for a comprehensive affidavit outlining the policy and its application history.
Political and Public Reactions
| Stakeholder | Response |
|---|---|
| AAP | Accused Centre of bias and delay tactics |
| Opposition Parties | Called for transparency in housing allotments |
| Legal Experts | Welcomed court’s push for policy clarity |
| Citizens | Mixed views on entitlement and fairness |
The case has reignited debates around entitlement, governance, and the use of public assets for political figures.
Bungalow Allotment Norms for Political Parties
| Criteria | Entitlement |
|---|---|
| Recognized National Party | One government residence in Delhi |
| Party President | Eligible if not allotted in any other capacity |
| Type of Accommodation | Not specified; subject to availability |
| Allotment Authority | Directorate of Estates under Housing Ministry |
The guidelines offer room for interpretation, which the court now seeks to clarify through documented precedent.
Conclusion: Court Demands Accountability in Government Housing Allotments
The Delhi High Court’s intervention in the Arvind Kejriwal bungalow case underscores the need for transparency and fairness in the allocation of government accommodations. While the Centre maintains that the allotment of 35 Lodhi Estate was made in accordance with existing norms, the court has questioned the absence of a clear policy and the discretionary nature of such decisions.
As the next hearing approaches on September 25, all eyes will be on the Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs and the Directorate of Estates to produce records that justify their actions. For Kejriwal and AAP, the outcome could set a precedent for how political leaders are housed in the capital. For the public, it’s a reminder that governance must be guided by rules—not whims.
—
Disclaimer: This article is based on publicly available court proceedings, verified legal documents, and media reports. It is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, political, or housing advice. All case details and judicial directions are subject to change based on official updates.
