A vacation bench of justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed that these heritage and open spaces serve as vital “breather” for Delhi residents.
The Delhi High Court on Monday questioned the Centre’s move to take over nearly 200-year-old properties, including the iconic Delhi Gymkhana Club, Delhi Race Club, and Jaipur Polo Grounds, purportedly for “public purpose”.
A vacation bench of justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed that these heritage and open spaces serve as vital “breather” for Delhi residents in a city grappling with pollution, and replacing them with high-rise structures could cause the Capital to “suffocate” and eventually render it unfit for its inhabitants.
“What are you going to do with all these heritage structures? Even Gymkhana is a heritage structure. What are you going to do? Make 20-storey buildings? Delhi will suffocate. You do all that you want to. [That area] is a little breather we have. That is all also going to go. All of us will suffocate and die,” the court remarked to the Centre’s standing counsel Ashish Dixit.
“Delhi people, please go to some small mountain and stay there. Delhi will not be fit for anyone for us. You all know how much we are choking because of pollution. The small lung that we have, do you want to take that away also? No, no, take it away. Ensure that people stop coming to Delhi,” the court said.
It added, “We have only high-rises all over. And you are saying, NDMC colony, we all had two-storey houses, now we have 20-storey houses… and if this is how you want Delhi to live, then God save us.”
The court also questioned the timing of the government’s decision, asking why the need to take over these properties that had remained in existence for centuries without any such intervention.
“They have existed for more than 200 years. Government never felt the need of the land… Defence requirement for what? This has been going on for years. We don’t know what you are going to make Delhi into.”
The observations were made while the court was hearing a petition filed by the Indian Polo Association (IPA) challenging an eviction order issued on May 20 under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act. The order directed the vacation of the 15.20-acre Jaipur Polo Grounds by June 4.
IPA sought a stay on the eviction order, contending that although it had informed the trial court that coercive action was likely to be taken after June 4, the court neither considered its appeal nor its request for interim protection, merely issuing notice and adjourning the matter to June 9.
