The Supreme Court on Friday booted out Congress MP Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury’s request to stay put in his Government bungalow and sent out a loud message that it will not tolerate the “malpractice” of elected representatives overstaying in Government accommodation.
It was the end of the road for Chowdhury, for whom it became an embarrassment after his plea to continue occupation of his Type-8 bungalow situated at 14, New Moti Bagh complex was rejected first by the Delhi High Court and now the Supreme Court.
Coming down harshly on the elected representative of the Congress, the Bench of Chief Justice TS Thakur, Justices AK Sikri and R Banumathi said, “There is something called
propriety. You have already overstayed for nearly two years in the house to which you have no entitlement. Show some respect.”
Advocate Bijan Ghosh who appeared for the aggrieved parliamentarian argued that the Government was acting vindictive towards his client to settle political scores. He cited the fact that electricity and water connection to the house had been snapped. “A person has some basic human rights and the Government must respect it.”
The bench failed to understand how the MP could continue in occupation in a bungalow to which he was not entitled to. Chowdhaury, a four-time MP from Murshidabad, West Bengal was allotted the bungalow when he became the Minister of State for Railways in the earlier UPA regime in 2012. But since the new regime came in 2014, Chowdhury continued in possession for about two years.
Chowdhury’s lawyer pointed out that he was paying the rent and awaiting a decision for his request of a suitable alternate arrangement. But the bench was not impressed. It said, “You must vacate immediately and find an alternate accommodation. You cannot grab this house and paying the house rent cannot be a consideration to permit you to illegally occupy the house.”
With the writing on the wall getting clear, Chowdhury’s counsel referred to the practice prevailing in lutyens Delhi where several elected representatives are overstaying in their bungalows without being evicted. The bench said, “It is a malpractice that elected representatives are overstaying in Government bungalows. You have no legal right to stay in a house to which you are not entitled.”