NEW DELHI: The Delhi high court on Tuesday said no order was required on a petition challenging the directive to vacate the Central Secretariat Club after the Centre informed the court that it had no plans to allot the premises to anyone at present.The central government made the submission during an earlier hearing of a petition seeking an interim stay on its decision to de-recognise the club, formerly known as Talkatora Club.Taking note of the submission, the court ruled no order was required to be passed.“Considering the above, no order is required to be passed. The petitioners are permitted to take away their belongings in the next one week. List on the date already fixed, that is, December 21, 2026,” PTI quoted Justice Amit Mahajan as saying.The high court was hearing an application filed by the Central Secretariat Club seeking an ad interim stay on the July 14 de-recognition order and the July 17 eviction order.During the hearing on November 5, the Centre’s counsel submitted that there was no proposal to allot the premises to any party at this stage.The court had earlier issued notice to the central government and sought its response to the petition.What’s the caseThe bench of Justice Mahajan was hearing the club’s challenge to the government’s de-recognition order and the eviction notice issued by the estate officer, directing it to vacate its premises in the President’s Estate.In its petition, the club alleged that the Department of Personnel and Training, through its July 14 order, had “arbitrarily, illegally and unconstitutionally” withdrawn the recognition granted to it.The petitioner contended that instead of acting on its complaints about alleged irregularities during the tenure of the ad hoc committee managing its affairs, the authorities withdrew its recognition in February without issuing a show-cause notice.
Share your thoughts in the comments
Be respectful · TOI community guidelines
Following the high court’s intervention, the club was granted a hearing, after which a fresh de-recognition order was issued on July 14.The petition described the July 14 de-recognition order and the July 17 eviction order as “ex facie arbitrary, malicious, unconstitutional, and a brazen, colourable exercise of administrative power.”It further alleged that the authorities were attempting to use their own “administrative failures” and the “misconduct” of the ad hoc committee to forcibly dispossess the club and shut down the institution, calling it a “violation” of Article 14 of the Constitution and the principles of natural justice.The plea also challenged the eviction order for treating the 107-year-old institution, which had been granted permanent occupancy, as an “unauthorised occupant” on the basis of what it termed an “illegal cancellation” of allotment.