On Tuesday, 17th October, the Delhi High Court allowed Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MP Raghav Chadha’s plea challenging the trial court’s order allowing the Rajya Sabha secretariat to evict Chadha from a Type VII bungalow in New Delhi.
Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani stated on Tuesday that the trial court’s April 18 ruling which ordered the Rajya Sabha Secretariat not to evict Chadha stands reinstated. The order, however, stands revived only till the adjudication of Raghav Chadha’s plea seeking a temporary injunction against his eviction from the Type VII bungalow.
The court has ordered Raghav Chadha to file an application for temporary relief with the city court within three days and has ordered the trial court to rule on it first in accordance with the law. The court directed the trial court to decide on Chadha’s plea under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code or Code of Civil Procedure (CPC).
“The appeal is allowed. Holding that A) there was no requirement for the appellant to file an application under 80 CPC to comply with that provision thus the application under 80 CPC is disposed of as infructuous. Directing the appellant to be present in the court within three days of the pronouncement of the judgement with the direction to the trial court to first decide the application under Order 39 rules 1 and 2 & thus to proceed in accordance with the law. In the meantime, the order dated 18/4 shall stand revived till the application under Order 39 rules 1 and 2 is decided by the trial court,” the bench said.
Notably, Rule 1 of Order 39– Temporary Injunctions and Interlocutory Orders provides that temporary injunction may be granted wherein it is proved through an affidavit or otherwise that “any property in dispute in a suit is in danger of being wasted, damaged or alienated by any party to the suit, or wrongfully sold in execution of a decree, or that the defendant threatens, or intends, to remove or dispose of his property with a view to defrauding his creditors, or that the defendant threatens to dispossess, the plaintiff or otherwise cause injury to the plaintiff in relation to any property in dispute in the suit,” till further orders in the matter or its disposal.
Rule 2 of Order 39 allows the court to grant an injunction to restrain the repetition or continuance of breach by the defendant(s).
Did the Delhi High Court say that Raghav Chadha is innocent?
Soon after the court ruling came out, the AAP MP ‘welcomed’ the court’s decision to allow his plea to review expulsion from the Type VII bungalow he occupies as if he had been vindicated.
Taking to X, Chadha in his ‘statement’ regarding the court ruling said, “I welcome the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court to set aside the order of the trial court, which was against me. The cancellation of this allotment was a clear case of political vendetta, aimed at silencing a young, vocal parliamentarian.” The MP also said that opposition voices were being “deliberately targeted”.
He claimed that this is not a fight for home or shop but to save the Constitution.
Contrary to Chadha’s claim, while the court has vacated the April 18 order which directed the Rajya Sabha secretariat not to evict suspended MP Raghav Chadha from the bungalow in question, it does not imply that the AAP MP is innocent or that there was no violation of the rules pertaining to the allotment of official residence to MPs by the House Committee, on his part.
Notably, the AAP MP from Punjab had on 10th October moved to Delhi High Court against a trial court ruling dated 5th October lifting the stay on its prior stay order on his eviction from his government bungalow located in Delhi’s Pandara Road.
Additional District Judge Sudhanshu Kaushik had ruled that MP Raghav Chadha is not entitled to the Type VII bungalow which he currently occupies, thus allowing the Rajya Sabha secretariat to undertake the process to evict the AAP MP.
Rajya Sabha MP Raghav Chadha was allocated a Type VII bungalow on Pandara Road in Delhi in September 2022. However, the Rajya Sabha Secretariat annulled the allotment in March 2023 since it exceeded his entitlements as a first-time MP. Subsequently, the AAP MP was allotted an alternate residence.
Chadha had challenged the order at Patiala House Court and obtained a stay on April 18th. The Rajya Sabha Secretariat later filed an objection to the stay order, saying that it was issued without providing them with an opportunity to be heard. The court heard both sides and removed the stay order on October 5th. However, the Delhi High Court has now granted Raghav Chadha permission to re-appear before the trial court within three days from October 17th.
Type VII bungalow: What do the rules say?
According to the Rajya Sabha Handbook, which specifies the eligibility criteria for accommodation, Rajya Sabha MPs, who are first-time Members of Parliaments, including Raghav Chadha, are entitled to Type V bungalows or single flats as their official residence.
It is mentioned in the Rajya Sabha Handbook that the MPs who were former Ministers of State, Deputy Speaker of Lok Sabha, Deputy Chairman of Rajya Sabha, nominated members, floor leaders of their parties and members who have served at least one term are allotted Type VI bungalows or twin flats.
Meanwhile, Type VII bungalows are allocated to MPs who have previously served in the Union Cabinet, or as Governors or Chief Ministers, or as Lok Sabha Speakers.
Furthermore, the Handbook stipulates that the House Committee chairperson may make exceptions. Chadha’s allocation of a Type VII bungalow required the approval of the chairman of the House Committee.
While Chadha’s counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi has argued that out of 245 sitting MPs in the Rajya Sabha, 115 have been granted accommodation above their ‘default’ entitlement, Additional Secretariat General (ASG) Vikramjit Banerjee appearing for Rajya Sabha Secretariat stated that he cannot demand negative equality over possessing government property.