The Delhi High Court Friday refused to stay the termination of the 'Green Card' rights for the overage dependents of members of Delhi Gymkhana Club [Mr. Siddhaant Mohta & Ors vs Delhi Gymkahana Club Ltd. & Ors.].
Justice Sanjeev Narula said the concept of a ‘Green Card’ appears to have emerged informally, without legal basis under Gymkhana’s constitutional framework.
“The Plaintiffs in the current case had no rights/contract to begin with to claim violation of natural justice principles. The contract concerning the Green Card is prima facie void ab initio. Therefore, the Plaintiffs’ membership has not been ‘terminated’ in the conventional sense; rather, it has been declared invalid from the outset and thus no rights including those under principles of natural justice can flow from there,” the Court said.
The rules at the Gymkhana allow dependents of permanent members to get limited access to the club between the age of 13 and 21. However, they need to apply for membership by the age of 22.
It was the case of the petitioners that they were unable to apply for the membership in time as they were not in Delhi or had other extenuating circumstances.
As per the plea, however, they were later granted the Green Card holder rights even after having turned 22. However, such rights of 125 persons were terminated in 2022.
The Court said such conferring of rights through the Green Card system contradicted the rule which strictly limits the use of Club facilities to only those dependents who are in the age bracket of 13 and 21
“This provision allows their children temporary access to the Club, contingent upon payment of nominal monthly charges. The privilege is inherently transient, expiring when the dependent turns 21. It carries no expectation of permanence, no entitlement to preferential treatment, and no guarantee of continued access,” it explained.
The Bench also said the mere fact that the bye-laws acknowledge the existence of Green Card holders does not by itself legitimize the practice, particularly where such issuance is in clear violation of the Club’s foundational document, the Articles of Association (AoA).
Since the exercise of issuing Green Cards to overage children of members itself has been deemed illegal and violative of Gymkhana’s rules, the same cannot be restored, it added.
The Court also opined that reliance on historical practices does not change the legal standing of the AoA as the Club’s constitution.
"Mere past practices or exceptions do not establish a vested legal right, especially, as already noted above, when such practices contradict the governing documents of the Club. The AoA serve as the constitution of the Club, and any policy, historical or otherwise, that conflicts with the AoA lacks legal validity," the Court said.
It also said that while the Indian Contract Act recognizes the principle of implied contracts formed through conduct such as long-standing practices, they must be within the lawful obligations of the club and cannot contravene an existing framework.
Concluding that the action was part of a necessary initiative to address systemic mismanagement and bring the Club’s operations in line with its foundational documents, the Court dismissed the applications for interim injunction.
The main suit will be heard next on November 11.
Siddhant Mohta & Others were represented by advocates Amir Singh Pasrich, Mohana Malhotra and Karan Bahmani.
Prem Shankar Jha & Others were represented by Senior Advocate Dinesh Dwivedi with advocates Ashish Mohan, Prateek Dwivedi, Krishnam Mishra, Nishant Singh and Sagrika Tanwar.
Pranati Kohli was represented by advocates Ashish Mohan, Sagrika Tanwar and Anmol Chawla.
Delhi Gymkahana Club was represented by Advocates Prateek Kumar and Raveena Rai.
[Read Judgment]