The Delhi High Court has called upon the Central government to present its response concerning two applications filed by a member of the Delhi Gymkhana Club and its staff welfare association. These applications challenge the government’s initiative to evict the club from its sprawling 27.3-acre property located in Lutyens’ Delhi.
Justice Avneesh Jhingan, who presided over the session, issued the notice to the government and scheduled the next hearing for July 28. The context of this legal battle stems from a recent show cause notice issued by the Estate Officer of the Land & Development Office (L&DO), following the government’s plea to evict the club.
Appearing for the Central government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta highlighted that he received the applications only a day prior. He mentioned that the Estate Officer’s hearing is slated for July 7, suggesting that the applicants might request a postponement of this hearing until after the court convenes on July 28.
In addition to Solicitor General Mehta, Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma and Central Government Standing Counsel Ashish Dixit represented the Centre in court. Meanwhile, Senior Advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Jayant Mehta appeared on behalf of club member Vijay Khurana and the Club’s staff welfare association, respectively.
The applications submitted by Vijay Khurana and the staff welfare association are part of ongoing suits before the High Court. These suits contest the government’s prior eviction order. During a previous hearing in May, the High Court chose not to issue any interim orders against the government’s directive, after being informed by SG Tushar Mehta that eviction actions would proceed only after due notice.
The club’s land was originally leased to it in 1928 on a perpetual basis. According to Clause 4 of the lease agreement, the Central government, as the lessor, maintains the right to reclaim the land if necessary for public purposes.
In 2022, the Central government initiated proceedings against the club before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), citing lease violations and mismanagement. The NCLT ruled in favor of the government, allowing the appointment of 15 government-nominated members to manage the club’s daily operations. The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) later upheld this order.
