In a significant development, a Delhi court has ruled that Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) Rajya Sabha MP Raghav Chadha has no right to continue occupying a government bungalow that was allotted to him. The court’s decision marks a setback for Chadha and has raised questions about the allocation of housing accommodations for parliamentarians.
The court’s ruling effectively lifts the interim stay that had previously allowed Chadha to remain in the bungalow, located in central Delhi’s Pandara Road. This means that the Rajya Sabha Secretariat now has the authority to ask him to vacate the premises at any time.
Chadha, in a strongly worded statement released after the court order, criticized the cancellation of the bungalow allotment, calling it “arbitrary and unprecedented.” He alleged that the move was made at the “dictates of the BJP to further their political motives and vested interest.” Chadha also pointed out that several other first-time MPs were residing in accommodations similar to his and asserted that he would be pursuing “appropriate legal action.”
The controversy began when Chadha was allocated a Type 6 bungalow in July of the previous year. Subsequently, in September of the same year, he requested a larger Type 7 accommodation, which was granted to him. However, in March, the Rajya Sabha Secretariat cancelled this allotment, arguing that Chadha, as a first-time MP, was not entitled to such a high-grade bungalow.
In response to the cancellation, Chadha had moved Delhi’s Patiala House court and obtained an interim stay on April 18, which has now been lifted by the court.
The court’s judgment stated, “Plaintiff 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.”
It further pointed out that, as a Member of Parliament, Chadha’s status was akin to that of a licensee, refuting the argument that allotments, once made, cannot be canceled under any circumstances during an MP’s tenure.
In June, the Rajya Sabha housing committee had already determined that the Type 7 bungalow exceeded Chadha’s entitlement as a first-time MP. Such accommodations are typically assigned to former Union Ministers, former governors, or former chief ministers.
Responding to the court’s ruling, Chadha asserted that he had been wrongfully targeted and victimized, accusing the BJP of attempting to silence vocal parliamentarians. He claimed that the cancellation of his accommodation had been done without notice and in violation of rules and regulations.
“The manner of the entire exercise leaves me with no option but to believe that these have been carried out at the dictates of BJP to further their political motives and vested interest in order to scuttle and stifle the political criticism raised by vocal parliamentarians like me,” Chadha said.
Chadha also highlighted that many of his fellow first-time MPs were living in accommodations that exceeded their entitlement, naming several individuals from different political parties who were in similar situations.
Despite the setback, Chadha expressed determination to continue representing the people of Punjab and India fearlessly. He noted that he would be taking appropriate legal action and vowed to uphold the voice of opposition on the floor of the house.
The controversy surrounding housing allocations for MPs has reignited the debate on the entitlements and privileges of elected representatives, with political implications that extend beyond the courtroom.
Sources By Agencies
