Mumbai Press Club Row: City Civil Court Rejects Gurbir Singh's Plea To Contest Elections Pending Expulsion Challenge

Mumbai Press Club Row: City Civil Court Rejects Gurbir Singh's Plea To Contest Elections Pending Expulsion Challenge

The Mumbai City Civil Court rejected former Mumbai Press Club president Gurbir Singh's plea to contest the club elections while his challenge to his expulsion remains pending. The court held that the club had substantially followed its disciplinary process and that its bylaws bar expelled members from contesting elections.

FPJ News ServiceUpdated: Thursday, July 02, 2026, 01:09 AM IST
Mumbai Press Club Row: City Civil Court Rejects Gurbir Singh's Plea To Contest Elections Pending Expulsion Challenge
Mumbai City Civil Court declined interim relief to Gurbir Singh, preventing him from contesting the Mumbai Press Club elections | File Photo

Mumbai, July 1: The Mumbai Civil Court on Wednesday rejected a notice of motion filed by former Mumbai Press Club president Gurbir Singh, seeking permission to contest the club election while his suit challenging his expulsion from the club is pending.

Court Declines Interim Relief

City Civil Judge A.H. Baig said, “As per the bylaws, a member who has been expelled on the basis of disciplinary action cannot contest the election. In such a situation, granting permission to the plaintiff to contest the election would amount to granting relief against the rules and bylaws of the club. The allegations and counter-allegations will be decided at the time of trial.” Singh will now move the Bombay High Court for relief.

Singh challenged the managing committee's April 27 decision expelling him from the club and sought an interim order allowing him to contest the election pending disposal of the suit.

The committee alleged he had organised a dinner meeting on the club terrace on January 19 with certain persons accused in the 2018 Bhima Koregaon case, damaging the club's reputation.

Expulsion Challenged

Challenging the expulsion, Singh claimed the managing committee did not act in good faith, failed to follow the disciplinary procedure prescribed under the rules, and that the inquiry committee acted in a biased manner. He also argued that he was denied a fair hearing.

The club and its office-bearers contended that the disciplinary action was legal, just and unbiased.

Also Watch:

After hearing both sides, the court observed, “After going through all the documents, prima facie it appears that the club has substantially followed the procedure before taking disciplinary action against the plaintiff and other two members. By and large, the principles of natural justice were also followed.”

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/