Delhi Gymkhana Club eviction notice valid part of contract: Centre to HC

New DelhiThe Centre has told the Delhi High Court that its notice directing the iconic Delhi Gymkhana Club (DGC) to vacate the premises at 2, Safdarjung Road, was a valid exercise of its contractual right of re-entry under the perpetual lease deed and did not amount to compulsory acquisition

The Centre has told the Delhi High Court that its notice directing the iconic Delhi Gymkhana Club (DGC) to vacate the premises at 2, Safdarjung Road, was a valid exercise of its contractual right of re-entry under the perpetual lease deed and did not amount to compulsory acquisition.

In a written statement filed through standing counsel Ashish Dixit on Tuesday, the Centre submitted that the premises, located in a sensitive and strategic area, are required for defence infrastructure, public security, institutional and governance infrastructure.

“The impugned notice is a valid exercise of the contractual right of re entry reserved under clause 4 and is not a compulsory acquisition. The Impugned Notice invokes Clause 4 and records that the premises, situated in a sensitive and strategic area, are required for defence infrastructure, public security, institutional and governance infrastructure, and public-interest projects integrated with adjoining Government land and that it issues with the approval of the Competent Authority. These purposes are not rendered legally incompatible merely because the premises have historically accommodated a private club,” the written statement read.

The statement added, “Long use, expenditure, sporting facilities and heritage recognition do not confer immunity from Clause 4, nor does the Grade-II Heritage Building/Precinct notification of 01.10.2009 (a planning/buildingregulation under the Delhi Building Bye-laws) override or freeze the contractual right of re-entry of the Lessor.”

Although the suit was listed before a bench of justice Subramonium Prasad on Wednesday, the same was adjourned for September 29.

The Centre had, on May 22, issued the notice directing the club to hand over the premises to the Land and Development Office (L&DO) by June 5, invoking a public purpose clause in the original lease deed.

On May 25, the Centre told the Delhi High Court that it would not take “immediate possession” of the iconic Delhi Gymkhana club in view of its May 22 notice directing the vacation of the premises by June 5, and any eviction-related action would be undertaken only in accordance with law and after issuing prior notice.

In its written statement, the Centre also questioned the maintainability of the club’s long standing member Vijay Khurana ’s suit, submitting that the February 1928 deed was executed between the Centre and the Delhi Gymkhana Club, while Khurana was neither a party to nor privy to the agreement. “The Perpetual Lease Deed dated 28.02.1928, and the rights and obligations arising thereunder including the right of re-entry reserved to the Lessor under Clause 4 constitute a contract exclusively between Defendant No. 1, as Lessor, and Defendant No. 2, as Lessee. The Plaintiff is neither a party to, nor a privy of, that contract,” the statement read.