'Land Leased To Azam Khan's Trust When He Was Minister' : Supreme Court Dismisses Jauhar Trust's Plea Against UP Govt Cancelling Lease

The Supreme Court on Monday (October 14) refused to interfere with the Uttar Pradesh Government's decision to cancel the lease of the government land to Maulana Mohamad Ali Jauhar Trust at Rampur.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manoj Misra dismissed a petition filed by the Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar Trust, founded by Samajwadi Party leader Azam Khan, challenging the cancellation of the lease deed dated February 4, 2015. The Trust approached the Supreme Court against the Allahabad High Court's judgment delivered on March 18, 2024, dismissing its plea against the Government's decision taken on March 31, 2023.

However, the bench requested the government authorities to ensure that the students of the school, which was functioning in the land leased to the trust, get admission to alternate suitable institutions.

Court-room exchange

Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the Trust in the Supreme Court, submitted that the decision was taken without giving any reasons. However, CJI Chandrachud, pointing out that the 2015 decision to grant the lease was taken when Azam Khan was a Minister, raised doubts about the validity of the lease being given to a private trust of which Khan was a lifetime member.

"While reading the judgment, it appears that your client(Azam Khan) was actually the cabinet minister in charge of the Ministry of Urban Development and he was the Minister for Minority Welfare. He got the land allotted to a family trust of which he is a lifetime member...and the lease initially was in favour of a government institute that is tagged to a private trust. How can a lease which was for a government institute be given to a private trust?", CJI asked.

Saying that he was not disputing the facts, Sibal highlighted that the petitioner was not given proper notice. "I am not disputing any of these. The issue is this. If they had given me a notice and reasons, I could have responded to it. Because, ultimately, the matter went to the cabinet. The Chief Minister took the decision. It's not just that I took the decision," Sibal said.

Misuse of office

CJI said that the facts of the case clearly highlighted a misue of the office and when the facts are so stark, a denial of proper notice may not be a substantial infraction.

"It is a misue of the office of the...initially when I started reading, I said, alright, look at notice, were you given an opportunity...but when you see these facts, what else...," CJI said.

Sibal however said that the cancellation of the lease was mala fide and highlighted that the Trust was giving education at concessional rates to poor students. Five per cent of the students are given education at the rate of twenty rupees, he said. "The exams were on 18th March and they took possession on 14th March. It is a not for profit organisation. 300 students don't have a school to go to now," he added.

"Mr.Sibal, the facts are gross..we will leave it at this," CJI said.

"I agree. What about the 300 students who don't have a school to go to? At least tell the government to adjust them," Sibal requested.

The bench dismissed the petition saying that there is no infirmity in the High Court's judgment. "Responding to the plea of the senior counsel that there are about 300 students studying in the school who have not been admitted to any alternate school, we would request the Secretary in the Department of School Education or as the case may be the competent authority of the State of Uttar Pradesh, to look into the above grievance and to ensure that no child is denied admission to a suitable educational institution," the bench added in the order.

Before the High Court, the UP Government submitted that the land allotted to Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar Technical and Research Institute was leased to the trust and a CBSE School was being run on the land, which was meant for higher education.

Case : EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MAULANA MOHAMAD ALI JAUHAR TRUST Vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH | D No. 35624/2024