Pre-conceived design to take over Gymkhana Club property: Civil suit in Delhi HC

Since 2022, the Club has been managed by government-appointed directors on orders of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). This was after the Ministry of Corporate Affairs moved the NCLT alleging irregularities in the management of the Club.

On May 22, the L&DO wrote to the Club terminating the lease that was signed on February 28, 1928, saying it needed the 27.03 acre plot on Safdarjung Road for “strengthening and securing defence infrastructure and other vital public security purposes”.

“The land is essential to fulfil urgent institutional needs, governance infrastructure, and public-interest projects, integrated with the resumption of adjoining government lands,” it said, referring to its recent taking over of the Jaipur Polo Ground and clearing of slums in the area near the Prime Minister’s residence. Under Clause 4 of the lease, the government could take back the land if it was needed for a public purpose.

Then on June 29, the L&DO issued an eviction notice under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 asking the Club’s representative to appear before it on July 7 for a hearing.

The civil suit pointed to a contradiction in the May 22 letter.

While Clause 4 of the lease, as cited in the L&DO letter, said the government can re-enter – that is take possession of – and then determine, which means end the lease and change the allotment, the letter said the government is determining and then re-entering the property. It added that this goes against Clause 4 of the lease and that this was done without issuing a show-cause notice to the Club.

“…the impugned order/letter is ex-facie illegal, and contrary to legal principles based upon a pre-conceived design to appropriate the property of the Gymkhana Club,” the civil suit said.

It added that Clause 4 of the lease, which was allotted by the Secretary of State for India in Council in 1928, itself was contrary to law.

“…alternatively Clause 4 as existing is unworkable, grant extensive power and is however contrary to law being inconsistent with the grant of the suit property to the Gymkhana Club, therefore, Clause 4 is liable to be declared void and unenforceable being contrary to law and unconscionable,” the civil suit said.

The land was given to the Club – an incorporated company – on payment of Rs 5,460. As per the lease, it was to be used for “a club and purposes for which the same are customarily used, including the holding of banquets, concerts and dances and the lodging and boarding of the members resident in the premises…,” the civil suit further said.

The L&DO has argued that it needs the land back for public purposes. In its eviction notice, it has said that the premises “constitute valuable public premises vested in the Union of India and the Government is under an obligation to regulate, protect and utilise such public property in accordance with public interest and public purpose”.