Delhi court paves way for Rajya Sabha Secretariat to evict AAP MP Raghav Chadha from government bungalow

A Delhi court on Thursday vacated its earlier order that restrained the Rajya Sabha Secretariat from dispossessing Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader and Rajya Sabha Member of Parliament (MP) Raghav Chadha of his government accommodation. [Raghav Chadha v. Rajya Sabha Secretariat].Additional District Judge Sudhanshu Kaushik said that Chadda has no vested right to continue to occupy the bungalow as the same was only a privilege given to him as an MP."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," the Court said..In September 2022, Chadha had been allotted a Type-VII accommodation bungalow at Pandara Road in Delhi. In March this year, he was told that the allotment had been cancelled as Type-VII was higher than his entitlement and he was allotted another flat.He sought a permanent injunction against the cancellation of Pandara Road bungalow allotment. The Court granted him interim relief on April 18 by restraining the Rajya Sabha Secretariat from dispossessing him of the allotted accommodation. .Seeking review of this order, the Secretariat argued that the procedure under Section 80(2) of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) was not followed while granting Chadha interim relief, as leave to institute the suit was not granted.A suit seeking urgent relief against the government can be instituted with the leave of a court under Section 80(2) CPC without serving of mandatory two-months notice to the government. However, the government or public officer is required to be heard first.It was also submitted that Section 80(1) of the CPC stipulates the pre-condition of giving two months notice prior to the institution of a suit against a government or a public officer.Further, the Secretariat said that it was contemplating proceedings against Chadha under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 as he became an authorized occupant of the bungalow..Chadha’s counsel argued that the Rajya Sabha Secretariat does not fall under the definition of 'government' or 'public officer'.However, the Court rejected the argument in view of the doctrine of approbation and reprobation.The court also noted that Chadha had moved an application under Section 80(2) of CPC for leave to institute the suit, but subsequently changed his version and claimed that no notice under Section 80(1) CPC was required to be served as the Secretariat does not fall under the definition of 'government'. .Chadha's argument that accommodation once made to a Member of Parliament cannot be canceled under any circumstances during their entire tenure, was rejected by the judge.“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."Accordingly, the court noted that when notice of application for institution of the suit was issued to the Rajya Sabha Secretariat, the interim relief also was granted simultaneously without following the due process of law.“This is certainly an error apparent on the face of the record and the same needs to be corrected. Accordingly, the order dated 18.04.2023 stands recalled and the interim order stands vacated,” it added.The court also said that Chadha failed to demonstrate the need for any urgent or immediate relief in the present matter, for which leave could be granted under Section 80(2) of CPC..Advocate Prashant Manchanda represented Raghav ChadhaAdvocates Sandeep Kumar Mahapatra, Sugam Kumar Jha, Osheen Verma, Kritika Sharma, Harsh Raj and Raghav Tandon represented the Rajya Sabha Secretariat..[Read Order]