Centre Takes Possession of Jaipur Polo Ground After Court Refuses Relief to Indian Polo Association

June 13, 2026 : The Central Government has officially taken possession of the Jaipur Polo Ground in Delhi’s prestigious Race Course area after a Delhi court declined to grant interim relief to the Indian Polo Association (IPA) against an eviction order issued earlier this year.

Vacation Judge Dhirendra Rana of the Patiala House Courts ruled on June 12 that there was no justification to stay the execution of the eviction order dated May 20, 2026. The court noted that similar relief had already been denied by both the Principal District and Sessions Judge and the Delhi High Court, making it inappropriate to grant a stay at this stage.

The dispute revolves around the multi-acre Jaipur Polo Ground located in Lutyens’ Delhi, which has long been managed by the IPA. The Union Government initiated eviction proceedings under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, contending that the land was required for public and defence-related purposes.

Following the court’s refusal to grant interim protection, the Centre, through the Land and Development Office (L&DO), formally assumed possession of the property. Notices were placed at the site declaring it to be Government of India property and warning that any unauthorised occupation, encroachment, construction activity, or other unlawful use would attract legal action.

The matter came before the Patiala House Court in an appeal filed by the IPA under Section 9 of the Public Premises Act. The association challenged the eviction order and sought a stay on its implementation pending adjudication of the appeal.

Appearing for the IPA, Senior Advocate Akshay Makhija opposed the government’s request for additional time to file its response and urged the court to restrain authorities from carrying out the eviction until a reply was filed.

Representing the Union Government, Central Government Standing Counsel Ashish Dixit sought time to file responses to both the appeal and the stay application. He argued that no valid lease in favour of the IPA was currently in force and that no grounds existed for granting interim relief.

The court observed that the eviction order was passed on May 20 and the appeal was filed on June 3. It further noted that neither the appellate court nor the Delhi High Court had granted any stay against the execution of the order.

Referring to proceedings before the Delhi High Court, the court recorded that the IPA’s writ petition had been disposed of on June 8 without any interim protection. The High Court had left the issue of interim relief to the appellate court while observing that there would be no immediate execution of the eviction order until June 12.

The Patiala House Court also noted that the District Judge had not granted any stay when the matter was first considered on June 3. In light of these circumstances, the court held that granting relief already declined by superior and coordinate courts would be contrary to judicial discipline and propriety.

During earlier proceedings before the Delhi High Court, the Centre had defended the eviction by asserting that the land was urgently needed for governmental and defence-related functions. The government emphasized the scarcity of available land in central Delhi and the importance of the property for public administration and national security requirements.

Consequently, the court refused to stay the eviction order, directed the Union Government to file its response to the appeal and stay application, and listed the matter for further hearing on June 17, 2026.