New Delhi No coercive action would be taken until September 16 regarding the eviction notice issued to the iconic Delhi Gymkhana Club (DGC), the government told the high court on Thursday.
It added that the club’s land is required for defence infrastructure, public security, governance infrastructure and other projects serving the public interest. It was renamed after Independence and remains one of the country’s oldest and most prestigious clubs. In the notice, an estate officer had directed the club’s representative to appear on or before July 7 to explain why the eviction proceedings should not continue in accordance with the earlier eviction order. It cited the termination of the club’s lease on May 22 and the government’s exercise of its right of re-entry under the lease deed. The DGC, adjacent to the Prime Minister’s residence in the heart of Lutyens’ Delhi, was established in 1913 as the Imperial Delhi Gymkhana Club. On May 22, the government directed the club to hand over its premises to the Land and Development Office by June 5, invoking a public-purpose clause in the original lease deed.
The notice said that the club’s continued occupation constitutes unauthorised occupation under the PP Act. In an affidavit, the government said the pleas were unmaintainable as the court lacks jurisdiction to entertain them. It said that the PP Act bars civil courts from granting any injunction in respect of action an estate officer takes or proposes to take. The affidavit said the officer alone has the jurisdiction to adjudicate the applications arising out of the eviction proceedings. The order noted that the property is located in a “highly sensitive and strategic area”.
It fixed September 16 as the next date of hearing. Khurana’s counsel, senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, sought time to obtain instructions after the court asked whether the petitioners were willing to file their response to the notice, as the question on whether it had jurisdiction to entertain the petitions remained pending. “Counsel for the plaintiff seeks time to have instructions.
The interim arrangement in the meantime will continue till the next date,” the court said. In their application, Khurana and the association said the June 29 notice is based on “entirely erroneous and premature assumptions”.
They argued it was issued even as their suit challenging the notice directing the club to vacate the premises remains pending before the Delhi high court and the validity of the lease termination is yet to be decided.
