Supreme Court Tells Mahua Moitra to Give Nadia Administration a Day's Notice Before Visit
The Supreme Court on Friday told Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra to inform the Nadia district administration a day before her visits so that arrangements, including accommodation, can be made according to protocol.
The order came while the court was hearing Moitra's plea challenging a September 1 circular issued by the Nadia district administration in West Bengal. The circular asked MPs and MLAs to give three to four days' prior notice before visiting the district so that the administration could make appropriate arrangements. A Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed that such matters should not reach the court and that what was needed was a small standard operating procedure.
Moitra, the MP from Krishnanagar, had alleged in her plea that district officials evicted her from a Circuit House in Nadia in August even though a room had been allotted to her at the state-owned property. Appearing for the West Bengal government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the Bench that no officer had asked her to vacate the premises and that all courtesies were extended to her. Senior advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appearing for Moitra, said the September 1 circular was aimed at her and argued that an MP ranks higher than the chief secretary under protocol. The Bench said the matter should be ironed out so that no one faces inconvenience. Mehta said the September 1 circular would not be given effect.
The court then told Moitra's counsel that her office should inform the district administration a day before her visit. When her counsel said rooms at the Circuit House should be allotted according to protocol, Mehta argued that allotment should also be subject to availability. Sankaranarayanan responded that availability could not be weaponised in this manner.
The Bench also considered Moitra's claim that the district administration was not cooperating in implementing the MPLADS (Member of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme). Her counsel said that after May 2026, the administration had stopped cooperating and that 18 projects were stalled. Mehta said these were not issues an MP should bring before the court. Sankaranarayanan said the court must step in if multiple steps were being taken to make it difficult for an elected representative to function, adding that Moitra was being singled out. Mehta replied that her political problems could not be solved in an Article 32 petition before the court. The Bench noted that Moitra had already approached the concerned authorities about the alleged non-cooperation, and observed that those authorities would deal with the issue adequately. If she remains aggrieved after that, she may approach the jurisdictional High Court.
On the night of August 14, Moitra said in a social media post that a large crowd had gathered outside the Circuit House raising "Jai Shri Ram" slogans after she refused to leave the premises. She wrote to Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla seeking his intervention and threatened to move court over the alleged harassment. In her letter, she claimed that nothing was conveyed to her when she made the booking and that she was not informed of any booking embargo when she checked in. She said the premises, located opposite the bungalows of the superintendent of police and the district magistrate, are supposed to be secure, where no crowd should be able to gather, let alone a lynch mob.
Source: Verdictum