Central Secretariat Club v. Union Of India And ORS
$~60 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4252/2026 and CM APPL. 20665-66/2026, CM APPL. 20667/2026 CENTRAL SECRETARIAT CLUB .....Petitioner Through:
Ms. Diya Kapur, Sr. adv along with Mr. Nakul Gandhi, Mr. Gurdeep Singh, Ms.Siddhi Sahoo, Mr. Aditya Ladha, Mr. Raghav Kumar and Mr.
Naibedya Amrit Dash, Advocates.
versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents Through:
Ms. Radhika Bishwajit Dubey, CGSC with Ms. Gurleen Kaur Waraich, Mr.
Kritarth Upadhyay, Mr. Amulya Dev Mishra Advocates
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
O R D E R
% 02.04.2026 1.
In deference to the observations made by the Court on 01.04.2026, Ms. Divya Kapur, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner points out that the impugned orders have been passed without extending any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
2.
On the other hand, Ms. Radhika Bishwajit, learned CGSC contends The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
that in absence of their being properly constituted body by way of an election, the petitioner has no locus to file the instant petition. She also submits that earlier various communications were made not only with respect to certain disobedience to the recognition letter but also directing the petitioner- Central Secretariat Club (hereinafter 'the Club') to conduct the timely election. She, therefore, contends that there is flagrant violation of all those directions and, therefore, the respondent-Authority was left with no other option except to de-recognize the petitioner-Club. She submits that, in any case, if the petitioner has any grievance, the remedy would lie in a civil suit.
3.
The Court without going into the allegations and the counterallegations, finds that before passing of the impugned orders, the petitioners were not afforded any opportunity of hearing. 4.
Under these circumstances, the impugned orders are directed to be treated to be the notices to the petitioner-Club. The petitioner-Club is directed to authorize its representative who shall submit the reply to the respondents within two weeks from today.
5.
It is upon to the petitioner-Club as to who would be authorized to represent the Club. The said representative shall be extended the opportunity of hearing.
6.
The respondents thereafter shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law.
7.
If the petitioner, thereafter, has any further grievance, the petitioner shall be at liberty to take appropriate recourse in accordance with law. 8.
With the aforesaid directions, the petition, along with pending applications, stands disposed of.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
9.
All rights and contention of the parties are left open. PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J APRIL 2, 2026/aks The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.