Should Have Vacated Govt Quarter When He Ceased To Be MLA: Patna HC Rejects Politician's Plea Against Demand Of ₹20.98 Lakh Penal Rent
The Patna High Court dismissed an appeal moved by politician and former Bihar MLA Avanish Kumar Singh who claimed occupancy over a government bungalow despite resignation, observing that the moment he ceased to be an MLA he ought to have vacated the government quarter. A division bench of Justice P. B. Bajanthri and Justice Alok Kumar Sinha held that the petitioner's continued occupation...
The Patna High Court dismissed an appeal moved by politician and former Bihar MLA Avanish Kumar Singh who claimed occupancy over a government bungalow despite resignation, observing that the moment he ceased to be an MLA he ought to have vacated the government quarter.
A division bench of Justice P. B. Bajanthri and Justice Alok Kumar Sinha held that the petitioner's continued occupation of Government Quarter despite the de-allotment of the quarter following his resignation was without authority.
To claim his stay in the quarter, Singh–who was nominated as a member of “State Legislature Research and Training Bureau” in 2014, had relied on a 2008 notification issued by the then Secretary of Bihar Legislative Council, as per which a member of “State Legislature Research and Training Bureau” was entitled to avail all the perks and privileges as was available to a member of either the Council or Assembly.
The Bench stated, “From a careful reading of the notification dated 21.08.2008, it is apparent that the said notification only says that a member of 'State Legislature Research and Training Bureau would be entitled to the benefit of house accommodations, daily allowance, telephone facility, facility of electricity duty etc. as that of an MLA or MLC.' It nowhere provides that a former MLA will continue to retain of his own will and volition the same government accommodation/quarter which he had earlier occupied as MLA. The said notification also does not answer the question as to how the petitioner continued of his own to retain the government quarter which belonged to the pool meant for ministers and also how did he continue to occupy the said quarter when pursuant to his resignation the said quarter had been de-allotted by the Bihar Legislative Assembly.”
"Government Quarter No.3 situated at Taylor Road, Patna had been allotted to the petitioner when he was an MLA. The moment he ceased to be an MLA he ought to have vacated the quarter immediately and should have requested for allotment of an appropriate accommodation in light of notification dated 21.08.2008, but instead of doing that he arbitrarily and illegally continued to occupy the Government Quarter No.3 situated at Taylor Road, Patna and all the time was pressurizing the authorities to regularise the same in his favour after he had ceased to be an MLA. Undoubtedly the conduct of the petitioner was improper. There is no doubt that the petitioner continued to illegally occupy the Government Quarter No.3 situated at Taylor Road from 14.04.2014 to 12.05.2016 and therefore the demand of Rs.20,98,757/- as penal house rent is completely legal and justified," the court added.
The court was hearing Singh's appeal against a 2021 order passed by a Single Judge, whereby, Singh, a five-time MLA, had approached the Court seeking quashing of a letter demanding Rs.20,98,757 as "penal house rent" for his alleged unauthorised stay in the government quarter from 14.04.2014 to 12.05.2016.
For context, the single judge had in its 2021 order dismissed Singh's plea on the ground that for claiming the same relief, the appellant/petitioner had earlier filed a plea in 2015 which was withdrawn unconditionally by the appellant/petitioner without seeking any liberty to move afresh.
Singh contended that after resigning from the Bihar Legislative Assembly in March 2014 to contest the Lok Sabha elections (which he lost), he was nominated as a member of the State Legislature Research and Training Bureau. He relied on the notification dated 21.08.2008 to argue that he was entitled to continue receiving perks and privileges equivalent to those of a sitting MLA or MLC, including government accommodation. Singh cited certain communications with officials of the Bihar Legislative Council requesting the Building Construction Department to regularise his occupation of the quarter.
The respondent authorities, however, argued that once Singh resigned from the Assembly, he had no entitlement to continue occupying the quarter, especially since it was part of the pool meant for ministers and had already been allotted to a sitting Minister. They further contended that Singh had not only overstayed illegally but also ignored repeated requests to vacate. His earlier writ petition on the same issue was withdrawn without seeking any liberty to move afresh, and hence the second petition was barred.
"Deploring" Singh's conduct the court referred to various judgments and said, "it is absolutely clear that time and again it has been held that a person who has been allotted government accommodation in his capacity as MLA/MLC does not have any vested right to hold on to it, once he ceases to be so. He should vacate the same upon ceasing to be an MLA or MLC. The appellant/petitioner of this case has acted completely contrary to the above well settled position in law and has thus invited upon himself the present situation whereby he has been rightly asked to pay penal rent which as per our above direction he should pay with interest as mentioned herein above"
Finding no merit in the appeal the court dismissed the same.
Case Title: Avanish Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar & Ors.
LL Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 46
Case No.: Letters Patent Appeal No. 459 of 2021 in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 19359 of 2016