The Delhi High Court is scheduled to pass its order on October 17, on the Aam Aadmi Party MP Raghav Chadha’s plea challenging the trial court order that enabled the Rajya Sabha Secretariat to evict him from the government accommodation.
The bench of Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani last week had kept the order reserved after hearing the parties at length.
Appearing for Raghav Chadha, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi had submitted that, It’s not a normal case of overstaying, not a case of fresh allotment or normal public property’s eviction. It’s a case wherein after proper application of mind by the Vice President highest authority of the country leads to an offer of allotment and acceptance of allotment to me. My physical occupation is 9/11/2022.
I am in charge of Punjab and 100’s of politicians come to meet me and it’s because of space. My family is living there. The sole ground of dismissal is a very strange ground, even though no urgency has been demonstrated. There cannot be a bigger urgency wherein I’ve been thrown out where my family is also living.
Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader and Rajya Sabha MP on Tuesday moved the Delhi High Court against Patiala House Court’s recent order which has enabled Rajya Sabha Secretariat to evict Raghav Chadha from his current accommodation.
Recently Trial Court passed an order vacated and recalled the stay order which granted interim relief to the Rajya Sabha MP Raghav Chadha that he would not be dispossessed from the current accommodation without due process of law.
The trial Court Judge Additional District Judge Sudhanshu Kaushik in an order passed on October 5, 2023, stated that on April 14 an interim relief was granted to the plaintiff (Raghav Chadha) that he would not be dispossessed from the accommodation without 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.
Further, after hearing the parties, I find that the plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that any urgent or immediate relief needs to be granted in the present matter for which leave could be granted under Section 80(2) of CPC. Plaintiff’s allotment was cancelled on 03.03.2023, whereas, the suit was instituted on 17.4.2023. The accommodation granted to the plaintiff falls under the definition of Public Premises.
As observed in the preceding paras, the accommodation allotted to the plaintiff is only a privilege given to him as a Member of Parliament. He has no vested right to continue to occupy the same after the privilege has been withdrawn and the allotment has been cancelled. The argument that the plaintiff was not given a hearing before the cancellation of allotment stands rejected as no such notice was required under the Law, said the ADJ Sudhanshu Kaushik.
Earlier on April 18, the Court in its interim order directed that Raghav Chadha, who is staying there with his parents shall not be dispossessed from the Bungalow without due process of law.
Court had also said a prima-facie case is made out for issuing directions to the effect that plaintiff/Raghav Chadha shall not be dispossessed from bungalow No.AB-5, Pandara Road, New Delhi without due process of law.
The balance of convenience also lies in favour of the plaintiff as he is residing in the accommodation along with his parents. Plaintiff would indeed suffer irreparable injury, in case, he is dispossessed without the due process of law, said the Court.
Accordingly, till the next date of hearing, the defendant is directed not to dispossess the plaintiff from bungalow No.AB-5, Pandara Road, New Delhi without due process of law. Notice of the application under Section 80 (2) of CPC be issued to the defendant to show cause in respect of the relief claimed in the suit, added to the court in the order passed on April 18, 2023.
Raghav Chadha in its civil suit stated that he on 6.7.2022, was allotted bungalow No.C-1/12, Pandara Park, New Delhi which falls under the category of Type VI bungalow. Thereafter, on 29.8.2022, plaintiff/Raghav made a representation to the Chairman, Rajya Sabha requesting for the allotment of Type-VII accommodation. The said representation of the plaintiff was considered and on 3.9.2022, in lieu of earlier accommodation, he was allotted bungalow No.AB-5, Pandara Road, New Delhi from Rajya Sabha Pool.
The plaintiff accepted the allotment and started residing therein along with his parents after carrying out renovation work. It has been stated that the plaintiff took the physical possession of the bungalow on 9.11.2022 and the allotment made in his favour was notified in the official gazette. The plaintiff has mentioned that he came to know that the allotment made in his favour had been cancelled arbitrarily and this fact was communicated to him on dated 3.3.2023.
Through the suit, Raghav Chadha has sought directions that a letter dated 3.3.2023 issued by the Rajya Sabha Secretariat may be declared illegal. He has also sought a permanent injunction to the effect that the defendant and their associates may be restrained from taking any further action in consequence of the letter dated 3.3.2023 and they may also be restrained from allotting the bungalow to some other person.
Apart from this, Raghav Chadha has also sought damages to the tune of Rs 5,50,000/- from the defendant for causing mental agony and harassment, stated the suit.
(With inputs from ANI)
