Why Govt took over Rs 410-cr land in the heart of Delhi allotted to news agency UNI more than 45 years ago

In a statement posted on X, UNI said the sealing of its office “has raised serious concerns over press freedom”, and alleged that “staff members were forcibly evicted” and “female journalists were manhandled by teams of Delhi Police”.

The sealing of the office of United News of India (UNI), one of the country’s oldest and most respected news agencies, has raised serious concerns over press freedom.

📌 Staff members were forcibly evicted, with several not allowed to retrieve their personal belongings.

📌… pic.twitter.com/dzaLObs49O

— United News of India (@uniindianews) March 20, 2026

Justice Sachin Datta of the High Court observed that UNI had continued to occupy “prime land” despite its “persistent failure” to fulfill the obligations attached with the allotment.

Part of the obligation stipulated under the allotment letter issued in 2000, was that UNI would construct a composite building on the allotted plot with the Press Council of India within two years.

However, with this obligation having remained unfulfilled, the L&DO, after issuing show-cause notice, cancelled the allotment in March 2023.

The High Court directed the government to “immediately take possession of the land” situated at an ultra prime location at 9 Rafi Marg. (Express Photo)

“…The facts of the present case reveal a situation where valuable public land has effectively been held hostage by a licensee who has failed to perform its obligations for decades. Such conduct strikes at the very foundation of the allotment framework governing public land. The cancellation of the allotment was, therefore, fully justified and legally inevitable,” the court observed in its order.

UNI had initiated insolvency proceedings in 2023, and it was taken over by The Statesman Ltd in February 2025. The new management of UNI had informed the court that it was now “willing and able” to raise funds for construction.

But the court ruled that “more than 45 years of persistent non-performance” could not be “retroactively cure[d] or excuse[d]”.

UNI, the court noted, had “miserably failed to construct the building”, and “there has been prolonged and unexplained inaction” on its part. It also said that L&DO “ought to have acted with alacrity” instead of issuing revised allotment letters to UNI, “which enabled the petitioner to continue its occupation of valuable public land…”.

The value of the land is estimated at Rs 409 crore at an indicative rate Rs 7.74 lakh per square metre, which shows the “high public value of the asset”, according to a government source. UNI went through a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, leading to the National Company Law Tribunal in February 2025 approving the resolution plan worth Rs 72 crore submitted by The Statesman.

“As a consequence, effective ownership and management control of the allottee has stood transferred to a private commercial entity without any prior approval of the lessor,” the government source said.

“The allotment having been made to a not-for-profit national news agency for a specific institutional purpose, the induction of a for-profit commercial organisation fundamentally alters the character, purpose, and eligibility of the allottee, thereby vitiating the very basis of the original grant,” this source argued.

A story that goes back more than 45 years

UNI was first allotted land by the L&DO at the 9 Rafi Marg address in 1979 for constructing a composite office complex intended to house the offices of five media organisations.

However this did not materialise, and subsequently a revised allotment letter was issued in 1986, which provisioned that the composite complex shall accommodate three media organisations — UNI, Press Council of India, and the Press Association.

But this too remained unrealised and, in 1999, yet another allotment letter was issued by the department – and yet another revised letter in June 2000. This letter allotted 5,289.52 square metres of land at the location, in favour of the Press Council of India (PCI) and the UNI equally, for construction of the composite office building for the two organisations.

In 2012, approval for construction of the composite building was issued, to be executed by NBCC, yet no progress ensued.

In 2017 and 2018, UNI wrote to the Urban Development Ministry, seeking clarification on the land use and the agreement structure necessary to execute and realise the composite building.

UNI vs PCI dispute over terms of allotment

From an initial division of equal shares to UNI and PCI of the 5,289-sq-m plot as per the 2000 allotment letter, by 2021, the share had tilted in favour of PCI – 2,644 sq m was allotted to the Council, and 2,024 sq m to UNI. The allotment of a bigger area meant higher premium and rent.

By 2022, UNI had fallen into deep trouble, and was struggling to survive financially. In January 2022, UNI wrote to MoHUA that “due to rapid changes in technology and business scenarios, as well as numerous other reasons”, the company was in financial stress, and requested that it be permitted to lease out up to 70 per cent of the proposed composite building after construction.

This was rejected by L&DO. Meanwhile, PCI continued to insist on expeditious construction on its allotted portion of the land, even as UNI expressed its inability to participate in the construction, and conveyed that PCI could proceed with the construction on its part of the allotted land independently.

In January 2023, the L&DO issued a showcause notice to UNI for cancellation of the allotment made to them. UNI responded saying it did not have a board of directors, all of whom had resigned by September 2022. Two months later, L&DO issued the allotment cancellation letter, on the ground of alleged violation of the terms of the allotment letter issued in 2000.

The L&DO pointed out that the allotment was made in 2000 for construction of a composite building with the PCI within two years of the date of the handing over the land. However, UNI had failed to comply “even after a lapse of 22 years”, and had never sought an extension of time for construction of the building.

UNI moved the Delhi HC in April 2023, terming the cancellation as arbitrary, unreasonable, and contrary to the terms governing the allotment.

In April 2023, the court granted UNI time to approach the authorities to take necessary action for conversion of land use from bungalow land to institutional land. However, insolvency proceedings were soon initiated against UNI, which were completed by February 2025. The Statesman Limited took over UNI.

Soon after the change of management at UNI, PCI moved the Delhi HC, alleging that UNI was carrying out unauthorised construction on the land and sought that it be restrained.

The court ordered L&DO to conduct an inspection. In July 2025, L&DO confirmed that such unauthorised construction activities had indeed been carried out, despite their land allotment having been effectively cancelled and the matter being sub judice.

The court ordered status quo. However, allegations between PCI and UNI continued to be traded over further unauthorised construction.

A second inspection was conducted in September 2025, which confirmed the violation of the HC’s order by UNI. UNI however, disputed the report, and insisted that no unauthorised construction was carried out.

Dismissing UNI’s plea, the court has now directed L&DO to keep a close watch on such conditional allotments of public land.

Emphasising that “a licence over public property is not a bounty or largesse to be enjoyed at the will of the licensee”, the court has said: “Public land cannot be allowed to be held hostage by a defaulting licensee who has failed to fulfil the very object for which the licence was granted.”

“The L&DO/Ministry of Urban Development is also directed to ensure that conditional allotments of public land are enforced with due diligence, promptitude, and institutional rigor, so that any breach or non-adherence to the conditions of licence does not remain unattended for inordinately long periods. Public authorities entrusted with the management of valuable public assets must remain vigilant to ensure that such land is utilized strictly in accordance with the purpose for which it is allotted and that deviations are addressed in a timely manner.”