Delhi High Court to Hear Plea Against Centre’s Move to Evict Delhi Gymkhana Club from Lutyens’ Delhi Property

May 25, 2026 : A suit has been filed before the Delhi High Court challenging the Central government’s directive asking the prestigious Delhi Gymkhana Club to vacate its 27.3-acre premises on Safdarjung Road in Lutyens’ Delhi by June 5.

The matter was mentioned before Justice Avneesh Jhingan, who agreed to list the case for hearing on May 26. The suit has been instituted by Vijay Khurana, a long-time member of the club, and was urgently mentioned through Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi.

In the plea, Khurana has sought a declaration that the Centre’s attempt to terminate the club’s perpetual lease is illegal and arbitrary. The suit also seeks a permanent injunction restraining authorities from taking possession of the historic property or dispossessing the club and its members.

The dispute stems from a May 22 communication issued by the Land and Development Office (L&DO), directing the club to hand over vacant possession of the land. The government invoked Clause 4 of the original lease deed, which permits resumption of possession if the property is required for a public purpose.

According to the Centre, the land, located close to the Prime Minister’s residence and other high-security establishments in Lutyens’ Delhi, is required for development of defence-related infrastructure, government facilities, and strengthening of public security arrangements.

However, the plaintiff has challenged the government’s justification, arguing that the reasons cited are vague, unsupported by material evidence, and merely a pretext to dispossess the club. The suit describes the proposed takeover as arbitrary and lacking any genuine public purpose.

The plea further alleges that the government has neither initiated acquisition proceedings nor offered compensation for the land, the premium paid under the lease, or the structures standing on the property.

Khurana has also argued that the impugned action violates Article 300A of the Constitution of India, which protects individuals and entities from being deprived of property except by authority of law. The suit relies on a December 18, 2009 government communication, which allegedly acknowledged that the perpetual lease granted proprietary rights to the club that could not be extinguished arbitrarily without due process and payment of compensation.

Additionally, the plea claims that the move is part of a broader attempt by the government to assert control over the institution, including recent efforts to take over the club’s management and administration.