Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra has escalated a dispute with the Nadia district administration by moving a privilege notice before Lok Sabha Speaker Om Birla over a late night order asking her to vacate a circuit house in Krishnanagar, West Bengal.
Moitra, who represents the Krishnanagar Lok Sabha constituency, submitted the notice against three senior Nadia district officials. The notice names Nadia District Magistrate Srikant Palli, Additional District Magistrate Nirpendra Singh and Nazareth Deputy Collector Anamika Bera. She has alleged that their conduct amounted to a serious breach of parliamentary protocol and was intended to obstruct her work as an elected representative.
According to the notice, Moitra had informed the Lok Sabha Speaker on August 13 about her proposed visit to her constituency after returning to West Bengal following the Monsoon Session of Parliament. She also requested protection against possible harassment or obstruction during her visit.
Moitra said she arrived at the Nadia Circuit House at around 6.15 pm on August 14. The circuit house is used as official accommodation for MPs visiting the district headquarters. According to her account, she was allotted her regular room, which had already been prepared for her.
She stated that she was served tea in the room at around 7 pm and dinner later in the evening. However, at approximately 9.47 pm, she received a telephone call from the Additional District Magistrate asking her to vacate the premises.
Moitra said she questioned the reason for the late night request. According to her complaint, the official told her that the order had come from senior authorities. Later, at approximately 10.52 pm, she received a WhatsApp message from the Nazareth Deputy Collector containing a copy of an administrative order.
The order was dated August 12 and reportedly stated that the circuit house would remain unavailable from the evening of August 14 until further orders because of annual maintenance and cleaning. The order also reportedly stated that reservations confirmed before August 13 would not be affected by the general suspension.
Moitra questioned why she was asked to vacate late at night if the administrative order had already been issued two days earlier. She also alleged that neither the booking staff nor officials had informed her about any suspension when she made the reservation or checked into the circuit house.
According to her notice, the room was ready when she arrived and staff continued to provide services. She further claimed that other government officials were occupying rooms in the same building that night. She questioned why the maintenance explanation was being applied to her accommodation while other rooms remained occupied.
Moitra also questioned the manner in which the order was communicated. She said that the document was not sent to her by email in advance and was not displayed at the reception desk. Instead, she received it through WhatsApp shortly before she was asked to leave.
The TMC MP alleged that no alternative accommodation was offered to her. She has argued that the circumstances surrounding the late night request raised questions about the treatment of an elected Member of Parliament and the protocol applicable to MPs visiting their constituencies.
The dispute became more sensitive because Moitra also referred to a crowd that gathered outside the circuit house later that night. She said she heard people shouting outside the premises and raised concerns about her safety. Earlier reports said slogans were raised by people gathered outside the building.
Moitra has alleged that the incident was part of a broader effort to intimidate her and interfere with her responsibilities as a Member of Parliament. She has therefore sought the intervention of the Lok Sabha Speaker.
In her privilege notice, Moitra asked the Speaker to take cognisance of the matter and refer the complaint to the appropriate parliamentary committee for examination. She has also sought protection to enable her to carry out her constitutional responsibilities without intimidation or harassment.
She has additionally requested that the West Bengal chief secretary ensure that the Nadia district administration provides her with the protocol facilities available to MPs during her constituency visits. This includes access to the circuit house when she visits Krishnanagar, subject to applicable rules.
The latest notice has turned a local administrative dispute into a parliamentary and political issue. The matter is particularly significant because the complaint concerns the treatment of an elected MP and the procedures followed by district officials while dealing with her accommodation.
Moitra has also referred to an earlier privilege notice that she had reportedly submitted against the Krishnanagar superintendent of police and other police officials following an alleged incident involving BJP workers. She claimed that the earlier complaint had not resulted in action.
The BJP and TMC have been engaged in political confrontations in Nadia, particularly following the change in the political balance in West Bengal. Moitra has faced protests and political demonstrations in the constituency, adding to the backdrop against which the circuit house dispute has unfolded.
The administration's reported explanation for the late night action was that the circuit house had been taken out of service for annual maintenance and cleaning. The timing of the communication and the circumstances under which Moitra was asked to leave are the main issues being questioned by the TMC MP.
The privilege notice does not by itself establish that the officials violated parliamentary privilege. The allegations made by Moitra will have to be examined through the appropriate parliamentary process before any conclusion can be reached.
The incident also raises broader questions about the protocol extended to elected representatives during official visits. Members of Parliament frequently travel to their constituencies between parliamentary sessions, and coordination between district administrations and MPs is important for ensuring that official visits take place without unnecessary disputes.
For Moitra, the issue is not limited to accommodation. She has argued that the manner in which the order was communicated, the late hour at which she was asked to leave and the presence of a crowd outside the premises created a situation that affected her sense of safety and ability to perform her duties.
The next stage of the matter will depend on the response from the Lok Sabha Speaker and the parliamentary authorities. The three officials named in the notice may also have an opportunity to present their version of events and explain the circumstances surrounding the circuit house order.
Until the matter is examined by the competent authorities, the allegations raised by Moitra remain claims made in her privilege notice. The reported maintenance order and the district administration's position will be relevant to any further assessment of the dispute.
Overall, Mahua Moitra's privilege notice has brought the Krishnanagar circuit house dispute into the parliamentary arena. The TMC MP has alleged a breach of protocol, intimidation and interference with her parliamentary responsibilities, while the controversy centres on a late night direction to vacate accommodation that she says had already been allotted to her.