New Delhi, Sep 2 The Delhi High Court has said that providing concessions to governmentemployees in the membership fee of the Golf Course does not inherently constitute arbitrariness.
A division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sanjeev Narula was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by athlete Mahendra Kumar Mohanty.
Mohanty objected to the difference in membership fees between government and private employees at Qutab Golf Course.
The PIL had specifically challenged the membership criteria set by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) for the Qutab Golf Course, situated in Mehrauli.
“A simple disparity in the fee structure, providing concessions to government employees, does not automatically translate into arbitrariness,” the court said.
The court said that differential pricing in clubs and recreational spaces is a familiar concept within society, and the mere presence of varying fee structures for government employees and private individuals does not automatically imply arbitrariness.
The court further stated that such differentiation, based on intelligible differentia, is in line with constitutional principles.
It said that the distinction in fees stems from variations in salary and resources available to government employees compared to their private counterparts.
Regarding the determination of membership fees, the court noted that factors such as operational costs, maintenance, and logistical considerations play a pivotal role.
“It is crucial to recognise that the sport in discussion – golf – demands meticulous and regular maintenance of its courses, which undeniably requires substantial resources. These upkeep necessities inevitably lead to the levy of high membership or user fees," it said.
The bench also rejected the argument that these facilities exclusively cater to 'elite government servants.'
While observing that Mohanty's submissions seemed to advocate for cost-free access to these facilities due to their location on government land, the court clarified that the fixed membership charges are not arbitrary.
Instead, they aim to strike a balance between providing high-quality amenities and ensuring their upkeep.
The court said that the mere fact that the DDA falls under the aegis of the government does not absolve it from financial practicalities"Generating revenue, in this case through membership fees, is indispensable to ensure that the golf course remains in prime condition and continues to
offer premier facilities to its members,” the Court observed," it said.
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor