L&DO fixes July 30 hearing for Delhi Gymkhana Club members

New Delhi, July 7 (PTI) The Land and Development Office (L&DO) will hear members of the Delhi Gymkhana Club on July 30 over the eviction issue following the Delhi High Court's direction that the proceedings before the estate officer be ensured after July 28. Club member Vijay Khurana and the Delhi Gymkhana Club Staff Welfare Association had challenged the June 29 showcause notice issued by the L&DO as part of eviction proceedings against the club under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971. Khurana said the members and representatives of the staff association met the estate officer on Tuesday and were given July 30 as the next date to present their submissions in response to the showcause notice. "We did not present our side today because the matter is listed before the High Court on July 28. After the court's decision, we will decide what can be placed before the estate officer," Khurana told PTI. On June 29, the L&DO, under the Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, issued a showcause notice asking the club to explain why an eviction order should not be passed. The notice had required a reply by July 7 and fixed a personal hearing on the same day. On Monday, Justice Avneesh Jhingan sought the Centre's response on applications filed by club members and staff seeking a stay on the operation of the June 29 show-cause notice. The court also asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to ensure that the hearing before the Estate Officer was adjourned until after the next date of hearing. The petitions form part of a pending challenge to the L&DO's May 22 order terminating the club's perpetual lease and asking it to hand over the 27.3-acre property by June 5, citing the need to strengthen defence infrastructure. Earlier, on May 26, the Centre had told the High Court that it would not take forceful possession of the premises by June 5 and would proceed in accordance with the law. In his application, Khurana contended that the June 29 notice was premature as it assumed that the club's lease had been validly terminated, an issue that is already under challenge before the High Court. The petitioners have also sought maintenance of status quo on the club's possession and functioning, or alternatively, a direction restraining the Estate Officer from passing any final order or taking coercive action until the court decides the matter. PTI SHB RT