Members and employees of the Delhi Gymkhana Club appeal the government's eviction action to the Delhi High Court. 
 

On July 6, the plea will be heard by Justice Avneesh Jhingan. 

Gymkhana Club of Delhi 
 

The Delhi High Court has received two cases against the Central government's attempt to evict Delhi Gymkhana Club from its 27.3-acre location in Lutyens Delhi. 
Vijay Khurana, a member of Gymkhana, and the Club's staff welfare organization have both submitted applications in the lawsuits that are currently ongoing. 
The applications will be heard by Justice Avneesh Jhingan on July 6. 
 

Gymkhana received a show-cause notice this week from the Estate Officer of the Land & Development Office (L&DO) following the Central government's petition for their removal. 
The two actions now before the High Court dispute government's prior order to leave the property. 
 

While hearing the pleas in May, the High Court had refused to pass any interim orders against the direction. This occurred after the Bench was informed by Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta that any eviction action would only be taken following appropriate notice. 

Avneesh Jhingan, Justice 
 

In 1928, the club was granted a perpetual lease on the grounds where it operates. According to clause 4 of the lease agreement, the lessor (the Central government) may reenter the property if necessary for public purposes. 
In 2022, the Centre began proceedings before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) against the club for violation of the provisions of the lease deal and mismanagement. The NCLT permitted the prayer and mandated that the Center choose 15 members to oversee the Club's daily operations.

Related News

If the accused is served with a consolidated notice of demand, a single complaint for the dishonor of more than three checks may be maintained: The J&K&L High Court

Orissa High Court Shares Concerns About Data Breach & Privacy Violations While Upholding Mandatory PAN-Aadhaar Linking For Demat Accounts

The Supreme Court dismisses the case against a public servant, stating that S. 197 CrPC does not envision the concept of "deemed sanction."