SC asks Delhi Gymkhana Club members to raise takeover concerns before HC

The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted liberty to 11 members of the Delhi Gymkhana Club, who had challenged the Centre’s decision to take over the club’s 27.3-acre premises and the subsequent eviction proceedings, to move the Delhi High Court.

Senior advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for the 11 members, told a bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana that a Central government-nominated committee is presently managing the club, and it cannot fight a legal battle with the government.

Singh said the government-nominated management had overstayed the NCLAT-mandated timeline for elections and restoration of elected control, and it was a mala fide attempt to take over the club. “Here, the lessor and the lessee are both under the control of the government,” he said.

Taking note of the submissions, bench disposed of the plea filed by Vipin Aggarwal and 10 other club members and granted them the liberty to either file a fresh plea in the Delhi High Court or make themselves a party in the pending case related to the eviction proceedings.

On September 3, the Centre, in a separate case, told the Delhi High Court that it would not take any coercive action till September 16 against the club in relation to its eviction from the 27.3-acre premises on Safdarjung Road. 

The high court was hearing pleas by club member Vijay Khurana and others seeking a stay on the June 29 show-cause notice for eviction issued to the club’s management by an estate officer of the Land and Development Office (L&DO).

On Tuesday, the top court said that the 11 members can approach the high court, which will examine the fresh plea on merits.

Aggarwal and others, in their petition filed through lawyer Nitin Saluja, sought quashing of the resumption notification issued by the L&DO on May 22 and the show-cause notice issued by the estate officer on June 29.

The petitioners alleged that the government’s actions constituted a “colourable exercise” of power and violated their fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 19, besides depriving them of property contrary to Article 300A of the Constitution.

“The impugned actions are not the isolated acts of a landlord but the culmination of a sustained and conscious design by Respondent No. 1 (Centre) to take over the respondent Gymkhana, a design pursued over a quarter of a century and now sought to be completed while the Gymkhana is under a government-nominated management installed by Respondent No. 1 itself, whose very validity is pending before this court in a civil appeal,” the plea said.

According to the petition, the May 22 notification determined the perpetual lease deed executed in 1928 and directed re-entry into the premises.

It said the land was required for strengthening and securing defence infrastructure, public security purposes, institutional needs, governance infrastructure and public-interest projects, the plea said.

The plea, however, said that the notification failed to identify any specific project or disclose the material relied upon to justify the takeover.

It also said that no compensation was provided and that the Ministry of Defence had not endorsed the decision.

The plea also challenged the government’s role in the club’s management and claimed that the government first secured control of the club through a Centre-nominated management committee and subsequently initiated proceedings to take the land and evict the club.

The plea said the government-nominated management did not effectively challenge the resumption notification or eviction notice and instead sought an alternative plot for the club.

The dispute has its roots in the government’s intervention in the club’s affairs through proceedings under Sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013.

The plea referred to a National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) order dated April 1, 2022, which superseded the elected general committee and permitted the nomination of 15 directors by the Centre.

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), in its judgment dated October 21, 2024, directed remedial measures and the holding of elections for an elected general council. 

The plea said the directions have not been implemented and that the matter is pending before the top court.

The petition also disputed the retrospective revision of ground rent by the Land and Development Office.

It said a demand for Rs 47.59 crore in arrears was raised on April 16, and that the demand has been challenged separately before the High Court.

On June 29, the L&DO issued a show-cause notice to the club, asking it to explain why an eviction order should not be passed against it under the Public Premises Act.