Delhi High Court
Suchitra Singh vs Union Of India & Ors. on 3 March, 2017
$~64
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 03.03.2017
+ W.P.(C) 3193/2015
SUCHITRA SINGH ..... Petitioner
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr Rahul Mehra, Advocate.
For the Respondents : Mr Aditya Singh, Advocate.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
03.03.2017
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. The petitioner, by the present petition, had challenged the
selection of the petitioner in the National Games. When the petition
was filed on 06.04.2015, this Court had issued a limited notice to the
respondents seeking their view on paragraph 5 of the said order.
2. Paragraph 5 of the order dated 06.04.2015 reads as under:-
"Having heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner and respondent no.2, I am prima facie
of the view that a mechanism has to be put
in place, which enables complaints to be lodged
much prior to the date when games are slated to
commence. A mechanism whereby, complaints
are entertained and opportunity is given to the
players against whom complaints are lodged and,
thereafter adjudicated upon, has to be put
in place. The mechanism has to be one which is
fair and gives reasonable opportunity both to the
complainant as well as the one against
whom complaint is made i.e., the respondent."
3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the Ministry
of Youth Affairs & Sports has recently constituted a Committee to
review the provisions of existing National Sports Code Development
of India, in the light of the recent developments and to submit its
recommendations. The Committee, it is stated, is examining all issues
relating to good governance in Sports including Athletes Grievance
Redressal.
4. In my view, the petition can be disposed of by directing the
Committee constituted by the respondents to also examine the prima
facie view formed by this Court on 06.04.2015 as noticed in
paragraph 5 extracted hereinabove.
5. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of directing the respondent
to place this order before the Committee constituted by it for
reviewing the existing National Sports Code Development of India.
6. The Committee would also take into account the prima facie
view expressed by this court in paragraph 5 of order dated 06.04.2015,
extracted hereinabove
7. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on
the merits of the case and the view noted in the extracted paragraph 5
is a prima facie view. The Committee would be free to examine the
same in light of the material before the Committee and take a view in
the matter without treating paragraph 5 as a mandate to the
Committee.
8. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
MARCH 03, 2017
'Sn'
