Delhi Gymkhana Club Staff Seek Job Protection Amid Legal Battle

(MENAFN- AsiaNet News)

Staff Seek Job Protection, Express Hope in Judiciary

The Staff Welfare Association of the Delhi Gymkhana Club on Tuesday said that employees are seeking protection of their jobs and livelihoods amid ongoing legal proceedings in the Delhi High Court, expressing hope for relief through judicial intervention.

Speaking to ANI, General Secretary of the Staff Welfare Association, Amit Acharya, said the staff's primary concern was the continuation of their employment and the uninterrupted functioning of the club. "Our primary demand is simply that our employment and our livelihoods remain intact right here, that the club continues to function exactly as it did before, and that our means of sustenance are not snatched away. The Gymkhana Club employs 650 staff members; when you include their families, combining everyone, this amounts to approximately 6,500 to 7,000 people. This entire community has been deeply shaken by this decision and has been in great distress for the past three or four days," Acharya said.

He added that a recent interim relief had brought some respite to the staff. "We secured an eight-week stay order. This has allowed the entire staff to breathe a collective sigh of relief; it is a moment of brief happiness for us. We hold the High Court in high esteem for having taken the concerns of the Gymkhana Club staff into consideration. We humbly request of them that, whatever their final verdict may be, they ensure that the staff's position here remains secure and that our jobs and livelihoods are preserved," he said.

Meanwhile, the President of the Staff Welfare Association, Nandan Singh Negi, also expressed confidence in the judiciary, stating that workers are hopeful of justice. "Our case is pending before the High Court. We have complete faith in the High Court that our workers will receive justice. This is a matter concerning the livelihoods of at least 600 to 700 workers. Some have taken housing loans; how will they repay them? It was for these reasons that we approached the High Court, and we respect the Court's authority. We remain hopeful that the High Court will grant us due justice and dignity, and that our livelihoods will remain intact," Negi said.

Centre Clarifies Stance in High Court

Earlier in the day, the High Court issued summons to the Centre and the Delhi Gymkhana Club management on civil suits filed by Club members, the Staff Welfare Association and others challenging the Union government's move to reclaim the Club premises at Safdarjung Road in New Delhi.

During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta clarified before the Court that the Centre's May 22 communication merely terminated the perpetual lease and sought re-entry into the Gymkhana land under Clause 4 of the lease deed. Along with SG Tushar Mehta, ASG Chetan Sharma and CGSC Ashish Dixit appeared for the Centre Government in the matter. He submitted that the communication was not an order for immediate eviction and assured the Court that any eviction proceedings, if undertaken, would only be carried out in accordance with law after issuing due notice.

Recording the statement made by the Solicitor General, the High Court declined to pass any further interim directions at this stage. The Bench observed that in view of the Centre's assurance that eviction, if any, would follow due process and prior notice, no interim protection was required at present. The Court also recorded the Centre's reliance on Paragraph 7 of the impugned communication, which states that in the event of non-compliance, possession would be taken "in accordance with law".

The Bench directed the defendants to file written statements within eight weeks and listed the matters before the Joint Registrar for completion of pleadings. The dispute arises from the Centre's May 22 communication directing the Delhi Gymkhana Club to hand over peaceful possession of the premises by June 5. The communication invokes Clause 4 of the perpetual lease deed executed in 1928, which permits re-entry by the lessor if the premises are required for a "public purpose". (ANI)

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianet Newsable English staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

MENAFN26052026007385015968ID1111171247