The Delhi High Court questioned the Centre’s move to reclaim land occupied by major sporting institutions, warning against the loss of green spaces in the capital. Expressing concern over worsening environmental conditions, the Court observed that unchecked urbanisation could severely impact public health and quality of life.
The Delhi High Court sharply questioned the Central government’s decision to reclaim land occupied by some of the capital’s most prominent sporting and recreational institutions, including the Delhi Gymkhana Club, the Indian Polo Club and the Delhi Race Club. Expressing concern over the shrinking green spaces in the national capital, the Court remarked that Delhi was already struggling with severe environmental stress and warned that further urbanisation of such open areas could have serious consequences for the city’s residents.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna, while hearing a petition filed by the Indian Polo Association, voiced strong reservations about the government’s plans for the land and the future of the heritage structures located within these historic institutions. The Court’s observations come amid growing concerns about rapid urban development, rising pollution levels and the gradual disappearance of open spaces in Delhi.
Backgrounds of the Dispute and Centre’s Defence
The matter before the Court arose from a challenge mounted by the Indian Polo Association against an eviction notice issued by the Central government on May 20, 2026. The notice directed the Association to vacate the Jaipur Polo Ground situated in the Race Course area of Central Delhi.
The Association argued that it had already approached the Patiala House Court challenging the eviction proceedings initiated under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act. However, according to the Association, the trial court merely issued notices in the matter and did not decide its plea seeking an interim stay on the eviction order.
Aggrieved by the delay, the Association moved the Delhi High Court seeking urgent intervention.
Appearing for the Union government, Central Government Standing Counsel Ashish Dixit defended the move to reclaim the land. He informed the Court that the properties were required for public and defence-related purposes.
According to Dixit, the Central government faces significant constraints due to the limited availability of land in Central Delhi. He argued that many critical governmental functions must necessarily operate from this part of the city and therefore additional space was required.
The government maintained that the decision had been taken in the larger public interest and was aimed at meeting administrative and strategic requirements.
Court’s Observations
During the hearing, Justice Krishna repeatedly questioned the government’s intention behind acquiring lands occupied by institutions such as the Delhi Gymkhana Club and the Indian Polo Club.
Referring to the heritage significance of these establishments, the Court asked:
“Why do you want the Polo Club? What are you going to do with all those heritage structures, even in Gymkhana? What are you going to do? Make 20-storey buildings?”
The remarks reflected the Court’s concern that historically significant properties and valuable green zones could eventually be replaced by large-scale commercial or administrative development.
The judge emphasised that Delhi’s residents were already grappling with deteriorating air quality and a shortage of open breathing spaces.
In one of the strongest observations made during the hearing, Justice Krishna lamented the steady reduction of open land within the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) area and warned about the environmental consequences of unchecked construction.
She Said,
“Little breather we have in the NDMC area is also going to go. All of us are going to suffocate and die. Government never needed the land in 200 years? Only you know what you are going to make Delhi into. You are saying Delhi people, please go to chhota-mota mountain [small mountains] and Delhi will not be fit. You have no idea how we are choking. Small lung that we have, you are going to take it away.”
The Court’s observations echoed concerns frequently raised by urban planners and environmentalists regarding the loss of green cover in the capital city, which has consistently ranked among the most polluted cities in the world.
Justice Krishna suggested that preserving such spaces was essential not only from an environmental perspective but also for maintaining the quality of life of Delhi’s residents.
The High Court, however, appeared unconvinced by the explanation and questioned whether replacing open areas with large-scale development projects could genuinely serve public interest.
Justice Krishna remarked:
“Making all high-rises is in the public interest? You look at Delhi, we have only highrises all over…God save us all if this is how you want Delhi to live. Whatever you do, you have the might, but the thing is, Delhi will choke.”
ALSO READ: Centre Allots Type-VII Bungalow in Lodhi Estate to AAP’s Arvind Kejriwal
The Court’s observations highlighted the tension between developmental objectives and environmental preservation, a debate that has increasingly shaped urban governance discussions in major Indian cities. The judge suggested that merely citing public interest could not justify every developmental intervention, particularly where it involved the loss of rare green spaces and heritage properties.
While refraining from deciding the larger issue relating to the government’s plans for the land, the High Court disposed of the petition filed by the Indian Polo Association with limited relief.
The Court directed the Patiala House Court to hear and decide the Association’s pending stay application against the eviction notice on June 10. By doing so, the High Court ensured that the issue would receive prompt judicial consideration at the appropriate forum.
The case has drawn attention beyond the immediate dispute involving the Jaipur Polo Ground. It has reignited a broader conversation about urban planning in the national capital, the preservation of historic institutions, and the balance between development and environmental sustainability.
Institutions such as the Delhi Gymkhana Club, the Indian Polo Club and the Delhi Race Club have long been regarded as part of Delhi’s colonial and post-independence heritage. At the same time, their sprawling campuses constitute some of the few remaining open green spaces in Central Delhi.
The outcome of the ongoing litigation could therefore have implications extending well beyond the parties involved, potentially influencing future decisions concerning land use, heritage conservation and urban development in the heart of the national capital.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE