The Delhi High Court on Monday questioned the Centre’s move to take over nearly 200-year-old properties, including the iconic Delhi Gymkhana, Delhi Racing Club and Jaipur Polo Grounds, allegedly for “public purposes”.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed that these heritage and open spaces serve as a vital “breathing outlet” for Delhiites in a city grappling with pollution, and replacing them with high-rise buildings could cause the capital to “suffocate” and eventually make it uninhabitable for its residents.
“What are you going to do with all these heritage structures? Even Gymkhana is a heritage structure. What are you going to do? Construct 20-storey buildings? Delhi will be choked. You do whatever you want.” [That area] It’s our little break. And that’s all going to go too. “We will all suffocate and die,” the court told the centre’s permanent counsel Ashish Dixit.
“People of Delhi, please go to a small mountain and stay there. Delhi will not be suitable for anyone for us. You all know how much we are suffocated by pollution. The little lung we have, do you want to take it away too? No, no, take it away. Make sure people stop coming to Delhi,” the court said.
“We have nothing but high-rise buildings everywhere. And you say, NDMC colony, we all had two-storey houses, now we have 20-storey houses… If this is the way Delhi wants to live, then God protect us,” she added.
The court also questioned the timing of the government’s decision, asking why it was necessary to seize these properties that had been standing for centuries without any such intervention.
“It has been around for more than 200 years. The government never felt the need for the land… Why defense requirements? This has been going on for years. We don’t know what Delhi will turn into.”
These observations were made while the court was hearing a petition filed by the Indian Polo Association (IPA) challenging the May 20 eviction order under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act. The order directed that the 15.20-acre Jaipur Polo Grounds area be vacated by June 4.
The IPA requested a stay of implementation of the eviction order, arguing that although it had informed the court of first instance that coercive action was likely to be taken after 4 June, the court had not considered her appeal nor her request for interim protection, and merely issued a notice and postponed the order to 9 June.
Dixit defended the move, arguing that the acquisition of an area of about 200 acres was intended to serve a public purpose, facilitate redevelopment, and meet some defense-related requirements.
Regarding the IPA, Dixit stressed that the government is yet to initiate any implementation measures and is not considering taking any coercive action as of Friday.
Thereafter, the court disposed of the petition directing the Patiala courts to decide the IPA’s request to stay the eviction notice by June 10.
