The Delhi High Court has focused on the Delhi Golf Club, an exclusive establishment spanning 179 acres near India Gate. The club's policy that permits the children of permanent members to join as 'dependents' or 'senior dependents' after turning 22 has raised concerns. The court has criticized this policy as "exclusionary" as it hinders individuals from the general category from becoming club members.

As per the DGC’s website, some membership applications have been pending since 1974. | Photo Credit: File Photo

In a recent ruling, Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sanjeev Narula noted, "This exclusivity prevents non-dependent individuals, who may be passionate golfers and willing to contribute to the development of the sport, from accessing the facilities and becoming members of the club."

The case was brought to the court,s attention by Prem Nath Vasistha, an elderly individual who identifies as a golf enthusiast. Vasistha, who applied for club membership in 2007 within the general category, is concerned that he might not live to see his turn or be too old to enjoy golf when his turn comes.

Vasistha argued that the club's membership policy, established in the 1930s, could lead to waiting times of over 40 years for general category applicants. Advocate Rohit Gandhi, representing Vasistha, pointed out that the club's Articles of Association specify a total capacity of 3,000 members, with only 900 slots available for the general public under Category C.

Of these 900 slots, half are reserved for senior dependents, 20% for government officers, and 30% for individuals in the Indian business/general category. The club's website indicates a backlog of 782 applications in the 'Indian Service Category' dating as far back as July 24, 1982, and 3,189 in the 'Indian Business Category' some dating back to September 21, 1974.

Vasistha's plea asserted that the club lacks reservations for professional and exceptional golfers, and there's no provision for preferential entrance or playing rights for enthusiastic golfers. Non-members also face substantial charges for one-time use of the golf course.

In its July 13 decision, the court observed that the club's lease agreement with the Indian government aimed at promoting golf and that the reservation policy deviated from this intended purpose. This discriminatory practice contradicts the principles of equal opportunity and fair access to public amenities, especially when the government-leased land is provided at below-market rates.

The court has directed the club's president to submit an affidavit detailing memberships granted over the past decade. This affidavit should also cover pending applications and their duration of pending status.