The Union government’s decision to resume 27.3 acres of land leased to the prestigious Delhi Gymkhana Club in Safdarjung Road follows years of escalating disputes over governance, membership practices, and regulatory compliance. This administrative action marks the culmination of a prolonged conflict between the government and the century-old institution, situated on prime government-leased land in the national capital.
Information was available with The Chenab Times indicating that the club had faced increasing official scrutiny over the past decade, particularly concerning the use of leased government land and adherence to public interest mandates. The friction intensified through various legal and administrative forums, highlighting concerns about opaque membership procedures and governance issues.
A significant turning point occurred in 2019 when the Central Information Commission (CIC), during the hearing of a Right to Information (RTI) appeal, mandated a review of the lease granted to the club since 1929. The commission sought to ascertain whether the club was adhering to the terms of its land allotment and its own Articles of Association. Then Central Information Commissioner Bimal Julka emphasized the public’s right to know about the functioning of an institution located on government land, especially when allegations of opaque membership practices and potential violations were raised by a complainant.
The confrontation escalated in 2020 when the Union Ministry of Corporate Affairs approached the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). The ministry alleged that the affairs of the Delhi Gymkhana Club were being conducted in a manner detrimental to the public interest, invoking Section 241(2) of the Companies Act. In its interim order in June 2020, the NCLT acknowledged the government’s claims that the club, operating on 27 acres of government-leased land, had become an exclusive enclave. The tribunal noted allegations that ordinary applicants faced decades-long waitlists, while relatives of existing members allegedly gained preferential entry through specific categories.
The NCLT further observed the government’s contention that funds collected from waitlisted applicants were reportedly being used to benefit privileged users who accessed the club through internal channels. Consequently, the tribunal imposed restrictions, restraining the club from admitting new members and staying its elections. It also permitted government nominees to oversee the functioning of the club’s General Committee, signaling increased governmental oversight.
In 2021, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) concurred with the NCLT’s finding that a prima facie case existed suggesting the club’s operations were contrary to public interest. The appellate tribunal also ordered a thorough examination of issues related to the land’s utility, membership practices, construction activities, and compliance with the club’s Articles of Association.
By April 2022, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs had effectively integrated its oversight into the club’s administration. The NCLT allowed the Centre to nominate 15 individuals to the General Committee, empowering them to manage the club’s affairs. This move solidified government involvement in the club’s day-to-day operations and strategic decisions.
In the same year, the Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) revoked the club trust’s exempted Provident Fund status. This action led to subsequent legal proceedings concerning the delayed transfer of provident fund securities and significant financial penalties. The club also faced ongoing litigation in the Delhi High Court regarding membership rights and internal governance, with disputes over specific access categories like “Green Card” and eligibility criteria surfacing as recently as 2024.
Throughout these proceedings, the club remained a subject of debate in various appellate forums and the Supreme Court. Matters related to the Corporate Affairs Ministry’s actions and restructuring disputes continued to be addressed. The government’s order to resume the land, issued on May 22, cites reasons including defence infrastructure requirements, governance necessities, and national security considerations. This order specifically invokes Clause 4 of the original lease deed, which grants the government the right of “re-entry” if the land is needed for a “public purpose.” This latest action is widely perceived not as an abrupt administrative measure, but as the resolution of a long-standing institutional conflict.
❤️ Support Independent Journalism
Your contribution keeps our reporting free, fearless, and accessible to everyone.
Or make a one-time donation
Secure via Razorpay • 12 monthly payments • Cancel anytime before next cycle
(We don't allow anyone to copy content. For Copyright or Use of Content related questions, visit here.)
The Chenab Times News Desk
