Legal basis explained behind Centre’s move on Gymkhana Club land
The Centre’s order to take back Gymkhana Club land in Lutyens’ Delhi highlights legal powers under lease deeds and public premises law. Experts say the government can resume leased land for public purpose, but such actions remain subject to judicial review
New Delhi: The Centre’s order asking the Gymkhana Club in Lutyens’ Delhi to hand over the 27.3-acre premises to it for “strengthening and securing defence infrastructure” has brought into focus the legal powers available to the Union government and the Land and Development Office (L&DO).
In cases like the Gymkhana Club, the Centre’s power flows from the terms of the lease deed.
Besides, the Centre has constitutional powers relating to acquisition of property and there are statutory provisions governing public premises. Legal experts say the government can take over a property or terminate leases, depending on the nature of ownership and the character of the land.
Where the land belongs to the government and has merely been leased to a private body, club or institution, the government can invoke the re-entry or termination clauses contained in the lease deed in cases of breach of conditions, misuse of land, expiry of the lease tenure or overriding public purpose.
In the present case, the L&DO has issued the order saying the premises, located in a highly-sensitive and strategic area of the national capital, are critically required for the strengthening and securing of defence infrastructure and other vital public-security purposes. The action was initiated through the invocation of Clause 4 of the original lease deed executed in favour of the then Imperial Delhi Gymkhana Club.
In Lutyens’ Delhi, areas are owned by the President of India and administered through the L&DO, and many clubs and institutions function on leasehold land rather than freehold plots. Legal action in such cases usually proceeds through the termination of lease, resumption of land and eviction proceedings under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971.
Under the Public Premises Act, once a lease is terminated, continued occupation may be treated as unauthorised, enabling eviction proceedings through an estate officer appointed by the Centre. Apart from contractual powers, the Centre can also acquire private property through the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
However, such acquisition applies in cases of private properties and not on leased government land where compensation rights may be limited because the ownership remains vested in the government.
Article 300A of the Constitution protects property rights by providing that no person shall be deprived of property except by the authority of law.
There have been judgments from various courts, including the Supreme Court, that held that the State cannot arbitrarily dispossess citizens and must follow due process, including notice, hearing and compensation, wherever acquisition laws apply.
Experts say there are judgments that have emphasised that the government’s power to resume leased land is not absolute and the power of a judicial review is available on various grounds, such as arbitrariness, mala fides, violation of lease conditions, discrimination, lack of public purpose or a breach of the principles of natural justice.
