Why the Centre wants Delhi Gymkhana Club’s prime land back after 113 years

The Union government has moved to take back control of one of the capital’s most exclusive and historic institutions — the Delhi Gymkhana Club — triggering fresh debate over elite land use, public purpose, and the future of prime government-owned real estate in Lutyens’ Delhi. 

In an order issued on May 22, the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, through the Land & Development Office (L&DO), directed the club to hand over possession of its sprawling 27.3-acre premises at 2, Safdarjung Road by June 5. The government invoked Clause 4 of the original lease deed, which allows the Centre to resume the land if it is required for a “public purpose”. 

MUST READ | Delhi Gymkhana Club: Inside the 113-year-old exclusive social address in Lutyens Delhi

The official communication, accessed through the release shared and corroborated by media reports, states that the land is now “critically required” for strengthening defence infrastructure, governance facilities and other public-security projects in a “highly sensitive and strategic area” of the national capital. 

The order effectively terminates the lease granted decades ago to the then Imperial Delhi Gymkhana Club Ltd., now known as Delhi Gymkhana Club Ltd., which has operated from the location since 1913. 

“The premises shall be taken over by the Land & Development Office on 05.06.2026,” the notice said, adding that police assistance may be used to maintain law and order during the takeover process if necessary. 

One of India’s most elite clubs 

Founded during the British Raj, the Delhi Gymkhana Club has long been associated with India’s political, bureaucratic and business elite. Located close to the Prime Minister’s residence, Lodhi Estate and key government installations, the club is regarded as one of the country’s most prestigious private institutions. 

The club traces its roots to the Imperial Delhi Gymkhana Club established in 1913, shortly after the British shifted the imperial capital from Calcutta to Delhi. After Independence, the word “Imperial” was dropped, but the institution retained its influence and exclusivity. 

DON’T MISS | Restless royalty, imperial roots: Here’s some interesting facts about Delhi Gymkhana Club

Membership at the club has historically been difficult to obtain, with waiting periods stretching into decades, according to multiple reports and public discussions. The club’s colonial-era architecture, sprawling lawns, restaurants, sports facilities and social networks have made it a symbol of old Delhi privilege. 

Long-running tensions with the Centre 

The latest move is not the first confrontation between the Centre and the club. 

In recent years, the Union government had already intervened in the club’s management citing concerns of mismanagement and public interest. The Ministry of Corporate Affairs had approached the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), leading to a government-appointed committee overseeing the club’s affairs. In 2024, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal upheld that intervention. 

Friday’s order, however, goes much further — seeking outright resumption of the land itself. 

DO CHECKOUT | From Delhi Gymkhana to Royal Bombay Yacht Club: Where power & legacy rules entry corridors

The timing is also significant. The Safdarjung Road property lies within a broader zone that has seen major redevelopment activity linked to the Central Vista overhaul and expansion of government infrastructure in central Delhi. Reports indicate adjoining government land parcels in the area have also recently been cleared or resumed for institutional use. 

Public purpose versus private exclusivity 

The government’s action is likely to reignite a larger debate around whether vast tracts of public land in prime urban areas should continue to remain under the control of exclusive clubs with limited public access. 

Supporters of the move argue that strategic land in the heart of the national capital should be used for national-security and governance requirements rather than private recreation. Critics, however, may question the transparency of the proposed redevelopment plans and whether adequate consultation has taken place.