Mahua Moitra: SC Hears Article 32 Plea Challenging Circuit House Eviction

• Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra filed a Supreme Court plea after her late-night eviction from the Krishnanagar Circuit House, despite a protective High Court order.
• The eviction, allegedly orchestrated by Nadia district officials, occurred on August 14, with a WhatsApp message citing maintenance as the reason, which Moitra disputes.
• Solicitor General Tushar Mehta questioned the admissibility of such "individual issues" under Article 32, while Moitra's counsel argued it involved "issues of federalism" and constitutional importance.
• Moitra also submitted a privilege notice to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla against the involved officials, alleging a breach of protocol and an attempt to obstruct her parliamentary duties.
• Another MP, K Radhakrishnan, supported Moitra's parliamentary action, urging the Speaker to initiate an inquiry or refer the matter to the Committee on Privileges.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta raised objections regarding the appropriateness of bringing such a matter directly before the Supreme Court under Article 32.

Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra has brought a petition before the Supreme Court, alleging a serious breach of protocol and contemptuous conduct following her late-night eviction from her official constituency accommodation. The incident, which forms the basis of her plea, occurred at the Circuit House in Krishnanagar, West Bengal, despite the existence of a protective High Court order.

According to Moitra's account, she arrived at the Nadia Circuit House, designated accommodation for Members of Parliament visiting district headquarters, at approximately 6:15 PM on August 14. She was assigned her customary room, which had been prepared for her stay. However, at 9:47 PM, she received a call from the Nadia Additional District Magistrate (ADM) instructing her to vacate the premises. When questioned about the reason, the ADM reportedly stated that the order originated "from the top," referring to the District Magistrate.

Later, at 10:52 PM, Moitra received a WhatsApp message from the Nazareth Deputy Collector, which included a copy of an order dated August 12. This order claimed the circuit house would be unavailable from the evening of August 14 onwards for annual maintenance and cleaning. However, Moitra's notice to the Lok Sabha Speaker confirmed that staff at the location indicated no cleaning or maintenance work was underway, apart from the installation of a water-iron removal system. She asserts that this eviction, occurring around 11 PM, was part of a "larger effort" to obstruct her parliamentary duties.

The Supreme Court, presided over by a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, heard the plea filed by Mahua Moitra. Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing Moitra, requested a passover, which the bench accommodated, agreeing to hear the matter on the subsequent day. The petition specifically invokes Article 32 of the Constitution, seeking direct intervention from the apex court.

During the proceedings, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta raised objections regarding the appropriateness of bringing such a matter directly before the Supreme Court under Article 32. Mehta argued that "individual issues of members of Parliament are directly being agitated before the Supreme Court. These are individual issues." He questioned whether all MPs would be entitled to approach the Supreme Court for similar personal grievances, suggesting a potential flood of such petitions.

Conversely, arguments presented to the court emphasized the constitutional significance of the case. It was highlighted that the eviction of a sitting lady Member of Parliament, particularly in defiance of a High Court protective order, raised "issues of federalism" and constituted an "important constitutional issue." The plea sought comprehensive directions from the court and an independent investigation into the actions of the local officials, including the Nadia District Magistrate, Additional District Magistrate, and Nazareth Deputy Collector.

In parallel with her Supreme Court challenge, Mahua Moitra has also initiated parliamentary action by submitting a privilege notice to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla. This notice, dated August 16 and filed under Rule 222 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha, targets the Nadia District Magistrate, Additional District Magistrate, and Nazareth Deputy Collector, alleging a serious breach of protocol.

Moitra's notice explicitly states her belief that the officials' conduct was designed to impede her ability to carry out her parliamentary duties. She had previously informed the Speaker on August 13, before returning to West Bengal after the Monsoon Session, about her constituency visit and had sought protection from any harassment or impediment. Through this privilege notice, she seeks the Speaker's protection to ensure she can discharge her constitutional responsibilities "free of intimidation and harassment."

Further underscoring the gravity of the situation, CPI(M) MP K Radhakrishnan also wrote to Speaker Birla, expressing support for Moitra. Radhakrishnan urged the Speaker to either initiate a formal inquiry into the matter or refer it to the Committee on Privileges, with the aim of holding the responsible officials accountable for their actions.

Source: Original reporting via Live Law