Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

In a plea against eviction from government accommodation, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi on behalf of Aam Aadmi Party MP Raghav Chadha on Wednesday contended before the Delhi High Court that Chadha is a victim of “selective targeting” as he has been a vocal opposition member of Parliament.

The senior counsel said that Chadha is the only sitting lawmaker in the Rajya Sabha ever to have been sought to be evicted from the bungalow allotted to him.

He submitted that the allotment of accommodation is an exercise of guided discretion and is made after taking into account the circumstances peculiar to the MP concerned, and in the exercise of this discretion, out of 245 sitting MPs in the Rajya Sabha, 115 have been granted accommodation above their ‘default’ entitlement.

Singhvi contended, “Chadha has been provided Z+ security in view of threats, and a large contingent of security personnel was required to be deployed at his residence. The personnel cannot be accommodated in the bungalow earlier allotted to him at Pandara Park. Punjab’s Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) government has accorded Z+ security to Chadha who is a Rajya Sabha MP from there”.

“Due to Chadha’s close association with the Punjab-Delhi region, and as he is an incumbent MP and a former MLA, a lot of people visit him regularly”, he said.

On the contrary, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Vikramjit Banerjee on behalf of the Rajya Sabha Secretariat argued that Chadha cannot seek negative equality over holding government property.

The negative equality principle implies that if the State has wrongly granted a benefit to one person, another cannot claim a similar benefit just because of that, he told. 

The ASG contended that if it were held that the Rajya Sabha Secretariat does not fall under the definition of "public officer" under Section 80 CPC, it would have "greater repercussions" on the law in the future.

After hearing the arguments at length, the bench of Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani adjourned the matter for October 12 at 4 pm.

Trial Court Proceedings 

On October 5, Additional District Judge Sudhanshu Kaushik vacated an earlier order that stopped the Rajya Sabha Secretariat from evicting Chadha from his government accommodation. The judge had said that Chadha had “no vested right” to continue to occupy his government bungalow after the cancellation of its allotment.

"Plaintiff (Chadha) cannot claim that he has an absolute right to continue to occupy the accommodation during his entire tenure as a Member of Rajya Sabha. The allotment of Government accommodation is only a privilege given to the plaintiff and he has no vested right to continue to occupy the same even after the cancellation of allotment," the court had said.

In June 2023, the Rajya Sabha Secretariat was directed by the court not to evict him from a Type-7 bungalow in Lutyens’ Delhi, which is usually allotted to lawmakers who are former ministers, chief ministers or governors, till the pendency of his application and without following the due process of law.

".. the argument that the accommodation once made to a Member of Parliament cannot be cancelled under any circumstances during the entire tenure of Member of Parliament deserves rejection," the court had clarified in the order.

Emphasising that Chadha had "no vested right in the accommodation and his status is akin to that of a licensee", the court had said that it "could be revoked by the competent authority at any time."

Earlier, Chadha had moved the trial court, stating the cancellation of the allotment of his Type VII bungalow on Pandara Road, New Delhi, did not follow due process of law, was “arbitrary”, and that “no reasons were provided” for it.

The AAP leader had claimed that for removing an MP from the bungalow, reasons must be provided in the letter of allotment. While appealing against the eviction, Chadha had prayed that he was residing with his parents.

Case Title: Raghav Chadha v. Rajya Sabha Secretariat