Delhi HC judge recuses from Gymkhana Club eviction case, cites personal involvement

A Delhi High Court judge on Wednesday recused himself from hearing a lawsuit over the Centre's action against the Delhi Gymkhana Club, including proceedings to evict it from its 27.3-acre premises on Safdarjung Road. Justice Prateek Jalan directed that the plea filed by the Delhi Gymkhana Club Staff Welfare Association be listed before another bench on Friday.While stepping aside from the case, Justice Jalan said, "I am going to recuse from this matter. There are matters where one does not trust one's own judgement." He further observed, "There is too much personal involved. I will feel more comfortable of someone else heard it."Gymkhana member Vijay Khurana and the Delhi Gymkhana Club Ltd Staff Welfare Association have filed separate lawsuits challenging the Land and Development Office's May 22 order terminating the colonial-era club's perpetual lease deed and asking it to hand back the land by June 5 on the grounds of "strengthening and securing defence infrastructure". Khurana's lawsuit is stated to have the support of more than 500 club members.They have also moved applications seeking a stay on the June 29 show-cause notice issued to the club's management by an estate officer of the Land and Development Office for eviction. The Centre had earlier said it would not take any coercive action on the eviction for the time being. In its response to the main matter, the Centre has said the lawsuits are liable to be dismissed. It has argued that third parties cannot restrain the enforcement of rights arising from the now-determined lease deed between the authorities and the club for the land parcel.The lawsuit filed by the Gymkhana staff says they are cooks, waiters, kitchen and housekeeping staff, gardeners and groundsmen, electricians and plumbers, lifeguards and security personnel working at the club, and has sought protection of their livelihood and their fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution. Seeking to set aside the Centre's May 22 notice, the plea says the Delhi Gymkhana Club is not a place of leisure for them but their place of work. In his lawsuit, Khurana has said the "vague" and "generalised" reasons of defence infrastructure and security cited by the Centre were a "sham". He has claimed the move was an "attempt to effect forced eviction" instead of following due process of law.In his interim application, he has said the June 29 notice proceeds on "entirely erroneous and premature assumptions", which strike at the substratum of the pending lawsuit. The application also says the show-cause notice was "pre-mature" as it wrongly presumed that the Gymkhana Club's perpetual lease had been validly terminated.The case will now go before another bench, with the challenges by club staff and members centring on the May 22 lease termination order and the later eviction notice, while the Centre maintains that the pleas cannot block action arising from the ended lease deed.- Ends