A woman who was allegedly discriminated against at the Delhi Golf Club in June due to her attire moved the Delhi High Court on Tuesday seeking directions to places of public entertainment not to discriminate against anyone or violate the right to human dignity.
The plea, which came up for hearing before a Bench of Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice C. Hari Shankar, sought the premier club’s response to a plea, which has also asked for a token compensation of ₹1 to Kong Tailin Lyngdoh.
Fundamental rights
The Bench issued a notice to the Centre on a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Ms. Lyngdoh and three others seeking directions to the Centre to ensure compliance with constitutional provisions of equality and non-discrimination by establishments which have been allotted land on lease. The Bench fixed the matter for hearing on January 30 next year.
The PIL, filed by advocate Vrinda Grover, said Ms. Lyngdoh was wrongly subjected to unconstitutional restrictions as she was not allowed to sit in the dining area of the club, thereby violating her fundamental rights. After the incident, Ms. Lyngdoh, a governess, had accused the club and its members of racial profiling, which was tantamount to racial discrimination of the tribal people, which is a punishable offence.
The Meghalaya State Commission for Women (MSCW) had summoned the Delhi Golf Club secretary over the incident but the move was stayed by the Delhi High Court.
Staffers at the Club had allegedly asked Ms. Lyngdoh, an invited guest, to leave the dining room on June 25 as her jainsem , a traditional Khasi attire, looked like a “maid’s uniform”.
Besides Ms. Lyngdoh, the other petitioners are journalist Patricia Mukhim, Professor Sanjoy Hazarika, who is currently the director of an non-government organisation, and activist V. Mohini Giri.
In their plea, they have contended that such prohibition was unreasonable and amounted to violation of “freedom”. The PIL has sought directions to set aside the rules, regulations, by-laws and memorandum of association of the club as they were in violation of the Constitution.
It also said that discrimination practised at various places of public entertainment, resorts, clubs, societies, body-corporates and associations, under the garb of rules and regulations, restrict the enjoyment of fundamental rights.
Incidents of violence
The petitioners have sought guidelines for adequate protection of civil rights and for governing the practices of clubs akin to the golf club, societies, body corporates and associations “in the absence of adequate legislative protection”. It also said that “Delhi has reportedly been the site of the highest number of incidents of violence and discrimination against people from the north-east.”
