Saturday, 02, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

All India Carrom Federation vs Union Of India
2018 Latest Caselaw 4576 Del

Citation : 2018 Latest Caselaw 4576 Del
Judgement Date : 6 August, 2018

Delhi High Court
All India Carrom Federation vs Union Of India on 6 August, 2018
       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                   Judgment reserved on: July 23, 2018
                                 Judgment delivered on: August 06, 2018

+     W.P.(C) 3314/2016, CM Nos. 38513-38514/2017
      ALL INDIA CARROM FEDERATION                             .... Petitioner
                             Through:      Mr. V.D. Narayan, General
                                           Secretary of the Petitioner-
                                           Federation in person
                             versus
      UNION OF INDIA                                       ..... Respondent
                             Through:      Mr.Bhagvan Swarup Shukla,
                                           CGSC with Ms.Komaldeep,
                                           Adv. for respondent No.1-
                                           Union of India
                                           Mr.Aseem Mehrotra, Adv. with
                                           Mr.Devang Gautam, Adv. for
                                           R2
+     W.P.(C) 5684/2016

     VIJAY KUMAR                                          ....... Petitioner
                             Through:      Mr. Jal Sahai Endlaw, Adv. with
                                           Mr.Devang Gautam, Adv.
                             versus
      UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                               ..... Respondents
                             Through:      Mr.Ajay Digpaul, CGSC with
                                           Ms.Madhuri Dhingra, Adv. for
                                           respondent-Union of India


     CORAM:
     HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

                                JUDGMENT

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

1. As these two writ petitions relate to elections in the All

India Carrom Federation, (AICF) with the consent of the counsel

for the parties, have been heard and are being decided together

vide this common order.

W.P.(C) 3314/2016

2. The present petition has been filed with the following

prayers-

"It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to:-

a) Issue writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Writs or direction or directions to quash and set aside the Order No. F.No.21-6/2015-SP-I dated 04.02.2016 issued by the Under Secretary, Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports, Government of India, New Delhi;

b) Declare that the election to various posts of Working Committee of the petitioner federation held on November 29, 2015 at Guwahati (Assam) for a term of 4 years was in conformity to election guidelines of the Sports Code and is valid;

And and/or;

c) Pass such other order/orders as deemed fit and proper by this Hon'ble Court in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioner."

3. It is the case of the petitioner Federation that petitioner is

a National Sports Federation registered as a Society under the

Society Registration Act, 1860 by the Registrar of Societies with

the main object of encouraging, promoting, developing and

stabilizing the game of Carrom. The petitioner is also recognized

by the Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports, Government of India.

It is averred, the respondent No.1 introduced model election

guidelines to be followed by all recognized National Sports

Federations (NSFs) as a part of National Sports Development

Code of India (NSCI), 2011 (in short Sports Code) on January

31,2011. Soon after introduction of Sports Code, the petitioner

Federation brought amendments to it's Rules and Regulations to

the extent they govern/regulate the election of office bearers to

it's Working Committee consistent with the Model election

guidelines / Election Bye Laws prescribed in the Sports Code and

accordingly elections to various posts of the Working Committee

of the petitioner federation were held on July 22, 2012 at

Gurgaon, Haryana by the Returning Officer Mr. Om Prakash

Verma, Addl. District & Sessions Judge (Retd.). It is further the

case of the petitioner, upon perusal of report of the Returning

Officer, the respondent No.1 vide its letter dated October 12,

2012 addressed to the General Secretary of the petitioner

federation informed that it has noted the report of the election of

the office bearers namely Mr. Rakibul Hussain as President, Mr.

P.S. Bachher as General Secretary and Mr. P. Raveendran as

Treasurer for a period of four years term for the period 2012 to

2015. Rule 15 of the Rules and Regulations of the petitioner

federation framed in conformity with Sub-Clause (2) of Clause 3

Model Election Guidelines provided that the office bearers of the

society are elected once in every four years at the Annual General

Meeting (Meeting of the Council) from amongst the accredited

representatives of the associations.

4. It is the case of the petitioner Federation, on July 25,

2015, the then General Secretary with the concurrence of the

President of the petitioner federation gave notice to all the

affiliated Units & office bearers of the Federation calling upon to

hold Annual General Meeting (General Council) of the petitioner

federation on September 13, 2015 at Guwahati to consider,

amongst other things, to discuss and decide about the election of

the Federation for the next term. It is stated, in the Annual

General Meeting of the petitioner federation held on September

13, 2015 at Guwahati, members unanimously agreed to hold the

election of the petitioner federation before it's due date and

decided to hold election on November 29, 2015 at Guwahati for a

term of 4 years. In the said Annual Meeting of the General

Council of the petitioner federation held on September 13, 2015

at Guwahati, members present also shown their displeasure over

the acts of some of the office bearers and other members of

federation who circulated a letter that they have conducted a

requisitioned meeting of working committee on May 30, 2015 at

Gurgaon and suspended the then General Secretary, Mr. P.S.

Bachher and appointed Mr. S. Udaya Kumar as officiating

General Secretary. Further it was unanimously resolved in the

said meeting of the petitioner federation that actions by the office

bearers and other members in the name of requisitioned working

committee meeting as illegal/unconstitutional and congnizance if

any taken at any level should be null and void. It is further the

case of the petitioner that although the petitioner federation did

not attach any credence to the purported requisitioned meeting of

the working committee, even otherwise the purported

requisitioned working committee of the petitioner federation

convened by some on May 30, 2015 at Gurgaon for suspension

the then General Secretary Mr. P.S. Bachher and for appointment

of Mr. S. Udaya Kumar as officiating General Secretary was

nullified by the Annual General Meeting (General Council), in

terms of Rule 26 of the Rules and Regulations of the petitioner

Federation.

5. It is further the case of the petitioner, the Under Secretary

of the Respondent No. 1 vide letter dated October 06, 2015

sought comments from the President, All India Carrom

Federation to a Writ Petition being All India Carrom Federation

filed by Mr. S. Udaya Kumar relating to suspension of then

General Secretary Mr. P.S. Bachher. Vide letter dated October

14, 2015, Mr. Rakibul Hussain, President, of the petitioner

Federation in reply to the letter dated October 06, 2015 of the

respondent No. 1 intimated to the respondent No.1 that the writ

petition filed by Mr. S. Udaya Kumar has been rejected by this

Court. It was also informed that meeting convened by Mr. S.

Udaya Kumar was not only illegal but also was an act of anti

federation activity. It was also informed that during the Annual

General Meeting, about two third members of the petitioner

Federation condemned the action of Mr. S. Udaya Kumar. The

President of the petitioner federation has also informed the

respondent No. 1 that Mr. P.S. Bachher is the General Secretary

of AICF and still has the confidence of more than two third

members of the petitioner Federation. In terms of Clause 5 of

Model Election Guidelines of Sports Code, the then President of

the petitioner federation vide letter dated October 14, 2015

requested Justice Sunil Kumar Kar, (Retired), to act as Returning

Officer and to conduct the election as per Model Election

Guidelines and the same was accepted by the Returning Officer.

It was also informed to him that as soon as the names of Electoral

College are finalized or within 24 hours from the last date of

receipt of such nominations, the complete list of Electoral

College in form no. 1 would be submitted. It is stated, the then

General Secretary of the petitioner federation vide letter dated

October 19, 2015 addressed to the Under Secretary of the

respondent No.1 informed that the federation has unanimously

decided to hold the election in Special General Meeting on

November 29, 2015 at Guwahati for which the President of the

petitioner federation has nominated Justice Sunil Kumar Kar,

(Retired) as the Returning Officer. It was also informed that the

election programme will be notified by election officers as per

Model Election Guidelines, issued by the respondent.

6. It is the case of the petitioner Federation, on October 26,

2015, the Returning Officer circulated the notice of the Election

Programme to conduct the elections of the petitioner Federation

for a term of four years in the Special General Meeting to be held

at Guwahati on November 29, 2015 detailing therein the dates

and time for finalisation of Electoral College, circulation of list

of authorized representatives, submissions of Nomination,

publication of list of all nominations received, scrutiny of

nominations, publication of list of valid nomination, withdrawal

of candidates, publication of Final list of contesting candidates,

polling if required, counting of votes: and declaration of results.

The Under Secretary of the respondent No.1 vide letter dated

November 03, 2015 requested the Director General of Sports

Authority of India, New Delhi a copy of which was also endorsed

to the petitioner federation, to depute Mr. Deka, Deputy Director,

SAI Centre, Guwahati as Government Observer for attending the

election meeting of All India Carrom Federation scheduled on

November 29, 2015 at Guwahati to observe the elections on the

aforesaid date and submit report to the respondent No.1 Ministry.

Besides various affiliated Associations of the petitioner

federation, the Pondichery Carrom Association to which Mr. S.

Udaya Kumar in the capacity of General Secretary under joint

signature of himself and that of the President Mr. Rajakkannu had

on November 09, 2015 nominated himself and Mr.G.

Krishnamurthy, as two representatives to form the Electoral

College for election to Working Committee of the petitioner. The

General Secretary of the petitioner federation as required under

Rule 4(5) of model elections guidelines prepared the list of

Electoral College in Form 1 comprising of 60 Authorised

Representatives from 30 Member States / Union Territories and

the list so prepared by him was circulated to all Member States /

Union Territories through its website wwwoindiancarrom.com on

November 15, 2015, a copy of which was also provided the

Returning Officer. It is also its case, the Under Secretary of the

respondent No.1 vide its letter dated November 16, 2015

requested the Director General of Sports Authority of India, New

Delhi that since it has come to the notice of the respondent that

Mr. L. Tikan Singh is presently working as Deputy Director in

Sports Authority of India, Guwahati, he may be deputed instead

of Mr. Deka, Deputy Director, for attending the election meeting

of the petitioner federation to be held on November 29, 2015 at

10:00 AM at Hotel Grand Majesty, Hatogaon, Near Namghar,

Guwahati to observe the elections on the aforesaid date and time

and submit a confidential report in a sealed cover to the Joint

Secretary (Sports) of the Ministry without any copy to anyone

else. In terms of Clause 6 of model election guidelines

prescribing nomination of candidates, the Returning Officer

under his signature prepared the, list of nominated candidates in

Form 3 as per model election, guidelines and publish the same in

his office.

7. It is the case of the petitioner Federation, after

compliance of clause 7, 8, and 9 of model elections guidelines,

the poll in conformity with Clause 10 was taken for the Posts of

President(1), General Secretary (1), Treasurer (1), Executive Vice

President(1), Sr. Vice Presidents(4), Vice-President (4) Assistant

General Secretary (1), Joint Secretary (West)(1), Joint Secretary

(East) (1), Joint Secretary (North) (1), Joint Secretary (South)(1),

Working Committee Members (6) as scheduled at Guwahati on

November 29, 2015, whereas the Post of Joint Secretary (North

East) (1), Director Technical, Director Media and Dy. Secretary-

Marketing were elected unopposed. After counting of votes by

the Returning Officer in conformity with Clause 11 of the model

elections guidelines on November 29, 2015 itself, the Returning

Officer, Justice Sunil Kumar Kar, (Retd.) under his signature

declared the result of election of All India Carrom Federation for

office bearers and members of the Managing Committee in Form

15 prescribed in model election guidelines and endorsed a copy

of the same to the President of the petitioner Federation. As per

the election result declared by the Returning Officer, Mr. Rakibul

Hussain, Mr. Vivek Dheesh Narayan (for short "V.D. Narayan")

and Mr. Arun Ramakant Kedar were declared as President,

General Secretary and Treasurer of the petitioner federation

respectively. It is stated by the petitioner that Mr. Tikan Singh,

the Observer to the election of the petitioner Federation refused

to sign in Form 15 declaring the result by the Returning Officer,

on the plea that he has been asked by the respondent No.1 to

submit the confidential report to the respondent No.1 directly,

although as per model election guidelines the said Form is

required to be signed by the observer deputed by the respondent

No.1, despite having been provided the complete information by

the General Secretary of the Federation upon his asking for the

same on the day of election held on November 29, 2015.

8. It is the case of the petitioner, that Mr. P.S. Bachher, the

outgoing General Secretary and Mr. V.D. Narayan newly elected

General Secretary of the petitioner federation vide letter dated

December 07, 2015 addressed to the Under Secretary of the

respondent No.1 submitted a list of elected office bearers

detailing therein that Mr. Rakibul Hussain, Mr. V.D. Narayan &

Mr. Arun Ramakant Kedar are elected to the post of President,

General Secretary and Treasurer respectively. On December 09,

2015, the Outgoing General Secretary Mr. P.S. Bachher handed

over the charge of the post of General Secretary of All India

Carrom Federation to the newly elected General Secretary Mr.

V.D. Narayan at New Delhi and the same was witnessed by Mr.

Khurshid Asst. General Secretary of the petitioner Federation. It

is further stated by the petitioner Federation that after taking over

charge of the Post of General Secretary of the petitioner

federation Mr. V.D. Narayan, has solicited entries from various

Zonal Teams for 13th inter-zonal National Carrom Championship

from 15th to 17th March, 2016 at Mumbai, for 44th Junior National

& Inter-State Carrom Championship 2015-2016 from 27th to 30th

March, 2016 at Varanasi (U.P.) and invited Junior Team and one

All India Panel Umpire of State Associations for National

Carrom Championship, for All India North East Zone Carrom

Championship 2015-2016 from 23rd to 25th February, 2016, for

All India East Zone Carrom Championship 2015-2016 from 26th

to 28th February, 2016 at Lakhi Sarai (Bihar), for All India North

Zone Carrom Championship 2015-2016 from 23rd to 25th

February, 2016 at Chandigarh. It is stated, while the petitioner

Federation was busy organizing events for selection of India

Team for participation in World Carrom Championship, it was

shocked to receive letter dated February 04, 2016 from the Under

Secretary of the respondent No.1 whereby the result of the

elections to various posts of petitioner Federation held on

November 29, 2015 is held to be not valid due to alleged

violation of the election guidelines of the Sports Code, with a

direction to the petitioner Federation to hold the elections afresh

at a place other than Guwahati inter alia on the ground that at the

time of appointment of the Returning Officer i.e. on October 19,

2015, the Electoral College was not prepared by the President /

Secretary of the Federation as required under the provisions of

the election guidelines of Sports Code and consequently the

Returning Officer was not provided with copy of the Electoral

College thus necessitating the Returning Officer to prepare the

Electoral College. The General Secretary of the petitioner

federation vide his letter dated February 04, 2016 addressed to

the Joint Secretary of the respondent No.1 replied to the letter No.

F.No.21-6/2015-SP-I dated February 04, 2016 received from the

Under Secretary of the respondent No.1 by placing on record that

the election of the petitioner federation has been conducted as per

the model election guidelines prescribed in the Sports Code,

besides stating therein that the petitioner federation has issued

prospectus for conduct of five Zonal / National Level Carrom

Championships and state association have made necessary

arrangements for the same and such unilateral decision of the

respondent shall cause lots of inconvenience and irreparable loss

to the entire Carrom Fraternity with the request to the respondent

Ministry to look into the matter and do justice with the players

who are World Champions and Organizers of events.

9. It is further the case of the petitioner Federation, that on

the representation of the petitioner Federation, the Under

Secretary of the respondent No.1 vide his letter dated February

08, 2016 addressed to the President of the petitioner federation

has although clarified that the decision taken by the respondent

Ministry for conduct of election has no bearing on the conduct of

any Championship or event organized by recognized office

bearers of the petitioner federation i.e Mr. Rakibul Hussain,

President and Mr. P.S. Bachher, General Secretary, yet has

communicated it's decision with the approval of Hon'ble Minister

Of State (Independent Charge) not to accept the election

conducted at Guwahati as valid and accordingly the petitioner

federation has been advised to conduct the election afresh by the

previous body, whose tenure is up to July, 2010 at a place other

than Guwahati. The General Secretary of the petitioner

Federation vide its letter dated February 21, 2016 addressed to

the Joint Secretary of the respondent No.1 reiterated that after

handing over of the charge of the post of the General Secretary

by Mr. P.S. Bachher to the present General Secretary, the

prospectus of 5 Zonal / National Carrom Championship for the

year 2015-2016 were issued by the present General Secretary for

the following events namely: North Zone Carrom Championship

2015-16, North East Zone Carrom Championship 2015-16, East

Zone Carrom Championship 2015-16, Inter-Zonal Carrom

Championship 2015-16 are to be completed by March 31, 2016.

It was also informed that 7th World Carrom Championship to be

organized from 6th November, 2016 in which 16th Nations are

likely to take part therefore the Federation has to select India

Teams well in advance so that the team can be sent in most

befitting manner thus it was requested that the decision-dated

February 04, 2016 to be reconsidered. It is the case of the

petitioner that the letter dated February 04, 2016 is contrary to the

facts on record and also on a perverse interpretation of election

guidelines of Sports Code and as such violative of Article 14 of

the Constitution of India.

10. It may be necessary here to state, when the matter was

listed on April 22, 2016 for the first time, this Court passed a

detail order. Para 6 of the same reads as under:-

"6. The representative of the petitioner to meet Mr. A.K. Patro, Under Secretary or the other Under Secretary or official dealing with the matter on 27th April, 2016 at 1500 hours along with all records and the said official to look into the matter and make further inquiries as to the claim of the petitioner and repercussion if any of holding election before due or any bar thereto and the report thereof be produced before this Court on the next date of hearing. The said official would also be free to contact the other members / factions of the petitioner to verify whether there is any challenge or dispute with respect to the election of the present office bearers of the petitioner."

11. The respondent Union of India has filed an affidavit on

July 12, 2016. In the said affidavit, they have referred to the order

passed by this Court on April 22, 2016 and the fact that a hearing

was held on April 27, 2016 before the Director (Sports) when Mr.

V.D. Narayan, the representative of the petitioner Federation was

present. Thereafter, the hearing was adjourned to May 03, 2016

as it was felt that Mr. V.D. Narayan and Mr. S. Udaya Kumar, the

respondent No.2 herein should be present. It is the stand of the

respondent no. 1 that the Ministry does not interfere in the day to

day functioning of the National Sports Federation including the

AICF. The development and promotion of various discipline of

sports including national / zonal championship, selection of

players and teams to represent India in the tournaments, conduct

of their organization, election, affiliation / disaffiliation of State

union etc is the responsibility of the relevant National Sports

Federation concern, which are registered under the Societies /

Trust / Companies Act. It is also stated that the Government

observer had submitted his report wherein it is stated that the

elections were conducted through secret ballot and although the

election process was to start at 11 am, the Returning Officer

started the election procedure at 11.45 am. He further mentioned

that out of 60 Members only 33 Members collected the election

ballot and casted their vote. There are many State representatives,

who did not cast their vote like Andhra Pradesh, Chattisgarh,

Gujarat, Haryana, Jammu & Kashmir, Kerala, Meghalaya,

Mizoram, Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttaranchal. Further, it is stated

that the Ministry has observed several anomalies in the elections.

The election was held at Guwahati on November 29, 2015 on the

basis of decision of Special General Body Meeting. However, as

per the model election guidelines, elections are required to be

held at the Annual General Council meeting from amongst

representatives of the States/ UTs / Boards / Institutions. Hence,

the election held at Guwahati was vitiated to that extent.

12. It is also stated that the participation of Orissa State is not

known from the records, though the State is a Member. It is also

stated that the records show that various important documents

relating to elections like notice of election, list of nominated

candidates, declaration of results etc show a mismatch of

signatures of the Returning Officer. Many of the important

documents, like declaration of results and counting of votes also

do not have the signatures of the Government observer. Thus, the

manipulation / forging of records and signatures cannot be ruled

out. It is stated that there were several other complaints alleging

irregularities committed in the election held at Guwahati. It was

further stated that respondent No.2 Mr. S. Udaya Kumar had

conducted election of AICF on May 15, 2016 at Hyderabad and

submitted his report in spite of the fact, they were well aware of

the hearing held with both the groups as per the direction of this

Court and the matter was sub judice. It is stated that Mr. S.

Udaya Kumar claims to have been appointed as Acting General

Secretary by the Working Committee, yet no authentic orders

have been produced. His taking over the charge, report bears

only his signature. No signatures of Mr. P.S. Bachher have been

observed in that report. The notice of Special General Body

Meeting issued by Mr. S. Udaya Kumar does not have the

approval of the President and thus the entire exercise of the

election carried out by Mr. S. Udaya Kumar on May 15, 2016 at

Hyderabad is of no significance. In substance, it is the stand of

the respondent no. 1 that the election at Guwahati violated the

guidelines of the Sports Code and the election process was not at

all fair and transparent and therefore, the respondent No.1 has

directed the petitioner Federation to hold the election in a fair and

transparent manner through the process in line with the

provisions of Sports Code.

13. The petitioner Federation has filed a rejoinder to the

affidavit filed by the respondent No.1. In its rejoinder to the

short affidavit filed by the respondent No.1 on May 18, 2016, it is

stated that the report submitted by Director (Sports) of the

respondent on May 13, 2016 has not been produced in this Court

on the plea that it is under examination of the respondent.

According to him, the report was to be produced before the Court

on May 18, 2016. It was not produced even on subsequent dates

of hearing on July 19, 2016 and August 16, 2016. It is stated that

the respondent in para 8 of their affidavit admits Returning

Officer has issued notice for conduct of election. However, the

respondent Ministry in the impugned letter dated February 04,

2016 has mentioned that the Returning Officer has issued notice

for the electoral college and treated it as violation of the election

guidelines of Sports Code, which is a contradiction. On the

election process, which was to start at 11 hrs but had started at

11.45 hrs, it is stated by the petitioner that if any Returning

Officer takes more time to start voting process, petitioner

Federation can neither be blamed nor it can be treated violation of

election guidelines of the Sports Code.

14. On the issue that, out of 60 eligible voters, 33 voters had

collected the ballot and casted their votes, it is stated by the

petitioner that percentage of voting cannot be ensured in any

election process. On the issue of whether elections can be held in

a special meeting, the petitioner had relied upon Clause 3.18 of

the Government guidelines wherein a reference is made that a

special meeting convened over four years (or earlier as required

under that tenure of the office bearers) to elect the Members of

the Executive Body including President and Secretary.

15. So far as Orissa matter is concerned, it is submitted by the

petitioner in its rejoinder that electoral college issued by the then

General Secretary on November 15, 2015, two groups sent the

names of representative of Orissa Carrom Association. Since the

matter over the post of General Secretary is pending in the Court

of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bhubaneswar, both the groups

have not been allowed to participate in the elections.

16. Insofar as the signature of the Returning Officer is

concerned, the petitioner cannot question the conduct of the

Returning Officer on any issue particularly on a signature, who

retired as a Judge from Guwahati High Court.

17. So far as the Government Observer‟s signature on Forms

14 and 15 is concerned, it is stated that the Government Observer

categorically refused to sign any document including election

results. On the issue of violation of guidelines of the Sports Code

and the election process being not at all fair and transparent is

concerned, the petitioner has stated as under:-

"(a) The 100% eligible members participated in the elections.

(b) The respondent ministry had deputed its Observer and the appointed observer did not give any adverse report.

(c) After issuing the impugned letter dated 4.2.2016 by the respondent ministry raising points as alleged violation and they could never defend those points based on the documents on records or / and based on their own guidelines.

(d) On the direction passed vide order dated 22.4.2016 by this Hon'ble Court in the present writ petition the respondent ministry had appointed the Director (Sports) and the said Director (Sports) submitted his reports within one month but the respondent ministry did not produce the same before this Hon'ble Court even after 3 months of its submission by the concerned officer of the respondent ministry."

18. The respondent no.2 has also filed a counter affidavit to

the petition. In his counter affidavit, it is stated by respondent

No.2 that the impugned communication dated February 04, 2016

of the respondent No.1, it has been categorically and

unequivocally stated that the elections of the office bearers of the

AICF held on November 29, 2015 at Guwahati cannot be

considered to be held in a fair and transparent manner. It is

averred that the election was held in violation of model

guidelines of the Sports Code. These anomalies include violation

of (i) Article 15(a)(i) of the Memorandum of Association of All

India Carrom Federation as according to the said Article,

elections have to be held in four years at the Annual General

Meeting; (ii) the elections were late by 45 minutes and started at

11.45 am instead of 11.00 am. Only 33 Members out of 60

nominated Members, who were authorized to cast votes casted

their votes in the elections. There is a discrepancy in the

signatures of the Returning Officer. The documents did not have

the signatures of the Government observer and several

complaints were received with regard to conduct of elections.

19. The Sports Code issued by the Government of India in

essence is complete and comprehensive Code, which provides for

amending the byelaws framed by the various sporting

Federations. With regard to the elections held on November 29,

2015, it is stated that the process was subverted and manipulated

by purported President of AICF Mr. Rakibul Hussain, who was

then serving as a Minister in the Assam Government. On the

apprehension that they will lose the election, Mr. Rakibul

Hussain resorted to illegal actions such as capturing of the

election venue by his political supporters. The Members of All

India Carrom Federation were against Mr. Hussain and his group

brazenly threatened with dire consequences and were asked to

vote in their favour. When all the measures of intimidation

failed, the group opposed to Mr. Hussain was restrained from

voting and they were forced to vacate the election venue. The

Members were subsequently left the venue under the protection

of the police. The aforesaid incidents were covered both by the

print and electronic media. Despite the abovementioned tactics

used by Mr. Hussain and his group, they failed to pull out

majority in the said elections. It is only one Member of the

Hussain group, who was able to secure 30 votes out of 60 votes

as per Electoral College and rest of the Members of the group of

Mr. Hussain, who were contesting for different positions in

elections could pull out only 29 votes out of 60 votes. The four

Members, who were coerced to vote for Mr. Hussain in the said

elections challenged the entire procedure of the election vide their

complaints dated December 02, 2015 and December 22, 2015 to

respondent no. 1.

20. It is also averred that election of Mr. Rakibul Hussain as

the President is illegal for the following reasons; (i) The Ministry

of Education and Social Welfare, Government of India had issued

letter dated September 20, 1975, which is Annexure XI to Sports

Code provides the tenure of office bearers of the sporting

Federation. The proviso to Clause 3 of the letter inter alia states

that an office bearer, who has completed one term shall be

deemed to have been elected if he/she secures a majority not less

than 2/3rd of the Members of the Federation / Association

concern. In other words, as Mr. Hussain able to muster only 30

votes against 40 votes required by him to become the President of

the AICF, his election was illegal and in a wrongful manner.

Respondent No.2 has also stated, the Orissa State Carrom

Federation, which was affiliated Member of respondent No.1,

was not included in the Electoral College on frivolous grounds

and was also restrained from participating in the elections despite

Court orders of the District Court at Bhubaneswar.

21. It is averred that Association of Bengal requested for

change of Electoral College as permitted under Rule 4(4) of

Model Election Guidelines. The same was not allowed and

consequently the nomination of their candidate was rejected. Two

governments servants Mr. Mukul Jha and Mr. S. Lyngdoh were

got elected in violation of Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports

letter dated February 04, 2010. Mr. V.D. Narayan elected as

General Secretary of the Federation, was ineligible to hold the

said post along with other two employees of the public sector

undertaking, who took part in the aforesaid elections without

taking no objection from their employers respectively. It is also

stated that the election is bad for the reason that voting

compartments were not provided in violation of Rule 10(6) of

Model Election Guidelines; ballot boxes were not sealed in

violation of the guidelines; attendance sheet of the voters was not

authenticated by the Returning Officer or government observer;

the government observer did not sign or verify Form 14 and Form

15; results were declared in different format other than prescribed

Form 15; various important documents including 12 pages of

Form 3, 4 and 6 pertaining to the elections has shown a mismatch

of signatures of the Returning Officer; scrutiny of nominations

was not undertaken in violation of elections circular of General

Secretary dated October 14, 2015 regarding remittance of annual

subscription and in violation of other provisions of Sports Code;

election notice was circulated by suspended General Secretary

Mr. P.S. Bachher; Electoral College was not prepared by General

Secretary but nominations were re-invited by the Returning

Officer with different schedule who prepared Electoral College;

complaints of assault, kidnapping, threat and prevention from

voting were reported to the Returning Officer immediately on

November 29, 2015 but he took no cognizance of those serious

complaints.

22. An additional affidavit dated March 19, 2018 has been

filed by the respondent No.1 wherein it is stated that a letter dated

July 05, 2015 signed by Mr. S. Udaya Kumar respondent No.2 as

In-Charge / General Secretary intimating that Mr. P.S. Bachher

has been suspended by the Working Committee for reasons

mentioned therein was received. It was also informed that the

Working Committee has directed Mr. S. Udaya Kumar to be In-

Charge / Acting General Secretary. In support of his contention,

Mr. S. Udaya Kumar has enclosed various documents like

minutes of the Working Committee dated May 30, 2015; notice

dated June 06, 2015 said to have been issued to Mr. P.S. Bachher;

report of the enquiry committee appointed by the Working

Committee on suspension of Mr. P.S. Bachher; email dated July

05, 2015 sent to Mr. P.S. Bachher informing of his suspension. It

is also stated in the affidavit filed by respondent No.1 that a letter

dated October 06, 2015 was written to the President of the AICF

seeking his comments on suspension of Mr. P.S. Bachher as

General Secretary of the AICF. However, no response was

received from the President of the Federation till the issuance of

the election notice for AICF by Mr. P.S. Bachher on October 15,

2015. Subsequently, on April 22, 2016 pursuant to the orders

passed by this Court, the Director (Sports) heard the parties.

During the hearing, one of the parties Mr. V.D. Narayan

submitted a document purported to have been written on October

14, 2015 by President of AICF stating that Mr. P.S. Bachher was

still continuing as General Secretary. The Director (Sports) who

heard the matter submitted his report inter-alia taking cognizance

of this document and concluded that the grounds for issue of the

order dated February 04, 2016 of the Department of Sports are

not found to be correct based on documents submitted by Mr.

V.D. Narayan.

23. A further affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent

No.1 on May 04, 2018 wherein in paras 3 to 6, it is stated as

under:-

"3. Based on the report submitted by Shri Vivek Narayan, Director (Sports) and documents submitted by the petitioner and the other faction, the matter was examined in the Ministry. On the findings of the Director (Sports) Shri Vivek Narayan the then Secretary (Sports) observed that the issue became complex due to certain documents submitted by the parties which were earlier not on record (e.g. Shri V.D. Narayan submitted a letter purported to have been written on 14.10.2015 by the then President of AICF stating that Shri P.S. Bachher was still continuing as General Secretary. The said letter was not received earlier in the Ministry and was submitted during the hearing only (copy enclosed as Annexure-

2). These documents were presented before the then Director (Sports) during the hearings only, which were earlier not brought out. Taking note of the above, the then Secretary (Sports) noted in the file on 16.062016 that:-

"The issue has become complex due to certain documents now being presented before Director (VN) which were earlier not brought out. Also, while the case has been sub-judice, another election has been conducted by some members of the Federation - where the returning officer was a Retd. District Judge. It would be better that a senior office examines the various facts and issues and suggests the way to be

followed as per Sports Code provisions-the same can be intimated to Hon'ble High Court before the next hearing. AS & FA may pl. examine and advise in time."

Copy of file noting of the then Secretary (Sports) is enclosed as Annexure-3 and letter dated 18.04.2015 from Shri S. Udaya Kumar declaring new elections is enclosed as Annexure-4.

4. The matter was then further examined by Additional Secretary & Financial Advisor of the Ministry, viz. Ms. Kiran Soni Gupta, who submitted her report on 21.06.2016. The report/observation is in the form of file noting (enclosed as Annexure-5). The report has been submitted by Additional Secretary clearly mentions that "Perused the file and all records". The report of the Director (Sports) was also on the file. Hence, it is not correct to say that the report of Director was not considered. The report/observation of Additional Secretary, inter-alia, states that Government Observer appointed by the Ministry for the elections of AICF held on 29.11.2015 at Guwahati has submitted in his report that elections were not held on time and out of the eligible 60 members only 33 members collected their election ballot and cast the vote. It is seen that 13 State Associations did not participate in the election process. The participation of Orissa State is not known from the records, though

they are a Member. The records also revealed that various important documents relating to the elections like notice of elections, list of nominated candidates, declaration of results etc show a mis-match of the signatures of the Returning Officer. Many of these important documents like declaration of results and counting of votes also do not have the signatures of the Observer Sh. Tiken Singh, the Deputy Director, Sports Authority of India who was appointed by the Ministry. Thus, the Additional Secretary observed that manipulations and forging of records and signatures cannot be ruled out.

5. The report of the Additional Secretary further states that records also show although Shri Udaya Kumar claims to have been appointed as acting General Secretary by the working Committee on 05.07.2015 yet no authentic orders have been produced. His charge taking over report bears only his own signatures. No signatures are seen by Mr. P.S. Bachher, who is claimed to be the then General Secretary. The notice of Special General Body meeting issued by him (held at Vadodara on 02.04.2016) does not have the approval of the President of the Federation and thus the entire exercise of elections carried out by Shri Udaya Kumar at Hyderabad on 15.05.2016 is of no significance and the Ministry may not give adequate cognizance.

6. The said report of Additional Secretary further

states that elections held at Guwahati on 29.11.2015 also violated the guidelines of the Sports Code and the election process was not at all fair and transparent. Thus, it is stated that the Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports (Respondent No.1 herein) rightly directed AICF on 04.02.2016 to hold the elections in a fair and transparent manner by the office bearers elected in 2012. It is submitted that the Ministry was advised by the Additional Secretary & Financial Advisor to maintain status quo until the case is decided by the Hon'ble Court. The Ministry has at the level of Competent Authority accepted the report of the Additional Secretary & Financial Advisor as well as her advise to maintain status quo until the case is decided.

It is to submit that the Hon'ble Court may decide the matter as deemed appropriate in view of the position of the Ministry as explained above."

24. I may state here that the following applications have been

filed by the petitioner / respondent No.2. I have referred to the

pleadings therein as relevant to the limited issue to be decided in

these petitions.

CM Nos. Relief sought for

14137/2016 Seeking ad-interim ex-parte stay of Order dated 4.2.2016

19043/2016 Order 1 Rule 10(2) r/w Order 1 Rule 8A and Section 151 CPC seeking impleadment of Mr. S. Uday Kumar as party respondent 16388/2018 Under Section 151 CPC Seeking permission to send India's entry and to ensure the participation of Indian Carrom Team in 5th Work Carrom Tournament

25148/2018 Under Section 151 CPC seeking permission to submit the entry form 45426/2016 Under Section 151 CPC seeking production of relevant documents 46888/2016 Under Section 151 CPC seeing direction against the R-1 to allow the duly elected office bearers of the petitioner Federation to carry out the functions of Executive Committee in terms of elections held on 29.11.2016 at Guwahati (Assam) 1585/2017 Under Section 151 CPC on behalf of petitioner Federation seeking permission to organize Senior National & Inter-State Carrom Championship 2016-17 38513/2017 Under Section 151 CPC on behalf of R-2 seeking direction against the petitioner Federation to strictly comply the OMs and orders issued by R-1 38514/2017 Under Section 151 CPC on behalf of R-2 seeking certain directions

W.P.(C) 5684/2016

25. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the

following prayers:-

"It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to:

1. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order to Respondent No.1 to direct

Respondent no.3 and Respondent No.4, not to take adverse action in violation of its order dated 04.02.2016;

2. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order to Respondent No.3 and Respondent No.4 to not use unauthorizedly the name and property of the Respondent No.2;

3. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any appropriate writ or order to Respondent No.1 to expedite its process pertaining to the recognition of the elections of the office bearers of the Respondent No.2 which were held on 15.05.2016 at Hyderabad;

4. Pass such other Order/further Orders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case."

26. In this case, the factual aspects as narrated by the

petitioner are almost similar to the one reproduced above, at least

till the issuance of order dated February 04, 2016 by the

respondent No.1. The averments as made in the writ petition post

the issuance of order dated February 4, 2016 are that on March

15, 2016, an email was sent by Mr. S. Udaya Kumar respondent

No.2 in W.P.(C) 3314/2016 to all State Associations informing of

the decision of the respondent No.1 dated April 04, 2016. On

March 16, 2016 notices of the meetings were issued by Mr. S.

Udaya Kumar to consider and take action on the decisions taken

by respondent No.1 vide its letter dated February 04, 2016. On

April 01, 2016 meeting of the AICF was held. Pursuant thereto,

on April 02, 2016 a Special General Body Meeting of the AICF

was conducted. On May 15, 2016 fresh elections were conducted

at Hyderabad in terms of the Model Elections Guidelines / Sports

Code and the memorandum of association of AICF. It is the case

of the petitioner, pursuant to the aforesaid elections, he was

elected as General Secretary of the AICF. Other office bearer

elected in the said elections was Neeraj Sampathy as President. A

reference is, made in the petition about the show cause notices

issued by the respondent No.3 in this writ petition namely Mr.

V.D. Narayan to all the affiliated Units as to why their State

Carrom Associations participated in the elections of respondent

No.2 which was held on May 15, 2016. A reference is also made

by the petitioner about his writing a letter dated June 06, 2016 to

the Under Secretary of the Ministry of Sports and Youth Affairs

declaring the respondent No.3 Mr. V.D. Narayan as persona-non-

grata and also bar him from all activities portraying himself as

General Secretary of respondent No.2 (AICF) and with a

specific request that the respondent No.1 should not entertain,

consider or respond to any communication made by Mr. V.D.

Narayan as General Secretary of AICF.

27. Counter affidavit has been filed by respondents 2 and 3

wherein it is stated that this petition has been filed with a view to

distract the attention of the Court and to delay the proceedings of

W.P.(C) No. 3314/2016. A reference is made to a challenge to

the order dated February 04, 2016. According to the respondents

2 and 3, the said letter is a combination of misrepresentation of

facts on record and also misrepresentation of the election

guidelines of the Sports Code.

28. Respondents 2 and 3 in their counter affidavit have

averred that the petitioner has concealed the following vital

facts:-

1. That the petitioner has submitted his claim as

representative of respondent No.2 in the Bank of the respondent

No.2 i.e State Bank of India, Chandni Chowk, Delhi-6.

2. The petitioner has participated in the election process of

the respondent No.2 held on November 29, 2015 which was

invalidated by respondent No.1 vide their letter dated February

04, 2016.

3. The petitioner had issued a letter dated November 11,

2015 through email to the members of the respondent no. 2 and

stated that one Mr. Perala Shekar Rao is the nominee for

President post from his group and is Vice Chairperson of Nehru

Yuva Kendra Sangathan of Ministry of Youth Affairs and

Sports, Govt. of India and has, great rapport with Mr.

Sarbananda Sonowal, the then Sports Minister, Govt. of India

and enjoyed his support and confidence. He had also stated that

Mr. Sekhar Rao will do his best and use his good office with the

Sports Ministry to see that Carrom is introduced in the National

games and also the Asian and Commonwealth Games. This

communication was forwarded to Mr. A. K. Patro, Under

Secretary of the Ministry of Sports, Govt. of India on November

25, 2015 for his information with a remark that Mr. Vijay

Kumar is using the name of the then Sports Minister Mr.

Sarbananda Sonowal as support of his panel.

4. The petitioner in the present writ petition is the General

Secretary of the Chhattisgarh Carrom Association, and is a

member of the respondent No.2.

5. The petitioner had filed his nomination for the post of

General Secretary of All India Carrom Federation in its election

held on November 29, 2015 at Guwahati wherein respondent

no. 3 (answering respondent) was duly elected as General

Secretary of the respondent no. 2.

6. The petitioner has declared himself as elected General

Secretary of the respondent No. 2 on November 29, 2015

without any election process. He has created lot of confusion

through media and other means of communication among the

various stakeholders including the innocent players.

7. The petitioner has participated in the meetings convened

by an unauthorized person in the name of All India Carrom

Federation.

8. The Petitioner has conducted the following two activities

under the authority granted in writing by the then General

Secretary Mr. P.S. Bachher of the respondent No.2 and signed

the participation certificates with Mr. P. S. Bachher to whom he

has mentioned as suspended General Secretary on the dates of

these activities.

a. All India Carrom Federation Cup Carrom Tournament

held at Raigarh in July 2015.

9. Sub junior National & Inter State Carrom Championship

at Raipur in September 2015.

10. The petitioner has participated in the Annual General

Body meeting convened by the then General Secretary Mr. P.S.

Bachher on September 13, 2015 at Guwahati and was part of

resolution passed by the General Council to take disciplinary

action against Mr. S. Udaya Kumar for his acts of projecting

him as Acting General Secretary.

29. On the aforesaid aspects, the respondent Nos. 2 and 3

have stated as under:-

(i) The elections of the respondent No.2 were held on November

29, 2015 under the supervision of Justice Sunil Kumar Kar,

(Retd.), who acted as Returning Officer. The respondent No.1

had also sent its Observer Mr. L. Tikan Singh, Dy. Director,

Sports Authority of India.

(ii) Respondent No.2 had submitted its election report to

respondent no. 1 on December 07, 2015 and to International

Carrom Federation, the apex body of Carrom in the World of

which the respondent no. 2 is member since 1988.

(iii) The answering respondent. no 3 had taken over charge

from the outgoing General Secretary Mr. P.S. Bachher on

December 09, 2015.

(iv) International Carrom Federation after scrutiny of

documents sent to them have ratified the election results and

issued a letter dated February 17, 2016 recognizing the newly

elected office bearers of Respondent no. 2. They have

mentioned that respondent no. 4 Mr. Rakibul Hussain and

Respondent No.3 Mr. V.D. Narayan are the recognized office

bearers of the respondent no. 2 AICF.

(v) The respondent no. 1 vide letter dated February 4, 2016

had unilaterally pronounced its decision that in view of the

violation of the Model Election Guidelines of the Sports Code

the result of the election of Respondent No 2 AICF held on

November 29, 2015 at Guwahati cannot be considered to be

held in fair and transparent manner and in accordance with the

provisions of the Sports Code.

(vi) Respondent No.1 vide its letter dated February 4, 2016

had raised the „following 4 points as violation to the Model

Election Guidelines of the Sports Code and made it as ground

for rejecting the election report submitted by the Respondent

No.2 through Respondent No.3 along with outgoing General

Secretary Mr. P.S. Bachher.

  (i)     Elections were held before its due date.

  (ii)    Returning Officer on October 26, 2015 had issued notice

  for preparation of Electoral College.

(iii) At the time of appointment of RO Electoral College was

not prepared.

(iv) Mr. P.S. Bachher was suspended by the Working

Committee but the election notice was issued by, Mr. P.S.

Bachher and the elections held in pursuance of that notice.

(v) Respondent No. 3 on behalf of Respondent No.2

immediately vide letter dated February 4, 2016 had submitted a

representation to the respondent no. 1 and clarified all the 4

points with documentary evidences in support of his arguments

that, the respondent no. 2 has not violated any clause of Model

Election Guidelines of the Sports Code.

(vi) The respondent no. 1 vide letter dated February 8, 2016

had issued a clarification to its letter dated February 4, 2016 and

admitted that Mr. P.S. Bachher is the recognized General

Secretary of the Respondent No.2. (At this stage the respondent

No. 1 had withdrawn one charge out of 4 charges of violation

which were alleged vide their letter dated February 4, 2016).

However, despite getting satisfactory reply, from the respondent

No.2 through respondent No.3 the respondent No.1 did not

respond to the remaining three points allegedly raised vide their

letter dated February 4, 2016.

(vii) A reminder dated February 21, 2016 to Respondent No.1

was sent by respondent no. 2 through respondent No.3 but did

not get any response to it for a period of about 50 days. It is

stated by respondent Nos. 2 and 3 that despite the fact that

respondent No. 1 had received the election report and report of

its observer by December 7, 2015 they did not take any action

on it for a period of more than 2 months. It is also stated that the

respondent no. 1 while replying to an RTI appeal had

categorically mentioned that after election and before Govt.

approval there are no guidelines to stop any elected office bearer

from functioning. Accordingly the respondent no. 3 had taken

charge from outgoing General Secretary Mr. P.S. Bachher.

However the Respondent No.4 who was elected once again

remained at his position in the new committee as well.

(viii) It is stated by respondent Nos. 2 and 3 that the respondent

No. 2 left with no other option but to approach this Court by

way of filing Writ Petition (C) 3314/2016. This Court vide its

order dated April 22, 2016 had passed an order as "meet the

representative of respondent no. 2 on April 27, 2016 and to look

into the matter and make further inquiries as to the claim of the

petitioner and repercussion if any of holding election before due

date or any other bar thereto and the report thereof be produced

before this court on the next date of hearing" i.e. May 18, 2016.

(ix) The respondent no. 3 on behalf of Respondent No.2 met

the Director (Sports) of the respondent no. 1 and clarified all the

points raised in the letter dated February 4, 2016.

(x) The Director (Sports) of the respondent No.1 further

called the respondent No.3 on May 4, 2016 along with one Mr.

S. Udaya Kumar to whom the respondent No.1 was treating as

faction of the respondent No.2.

(xi) In the meantime while the legal process was on through

W.P. (C) 3314/2016 to find out the genuineness of letter dated

February 4, 2016 issued by the respondent no. 1, Mr. S. Udaya

Kumar without any authority convened purported meeting of

AGM on May 15, 2016 stating that as per order dated February

4, 2016 of the respondent no. 1 the AGM and election of

respondent no. 2 is being conducted on May 15, 2016 at

Hyderabad.

(xii) On May 18, 2016 the next date of hearing of WP (C)

3314/2016 All India Carrom Federation Vs. Union of India the

respondent no. 1, instead of filing the report of the officer, who

conducted the hearing on the direction of this Court vide its

order dated April 22, 2016, had submitted an affidavit stating

that the Director (Sports) had submitted his report on May 13,

2016 but the same is under examination of respondent no. 1.

The respondent no. 1 sought six weeks time, which was granted

and fixed next date of hearing on July 19, 2016. It is stated that

as per the Court order dated April 22, 2016 in WP (C)

3314/2016 the report so prepared by the Director (Sports) of the

respondent No.1 after meeting the petitioner on April 27, 2016

and May 04, 2016 was required to be filed in the court on May

18, 2016 but the report was kept with respondent for their

examination before producing it to the court. The petitioner has

not been provided a copy of this report ever. However, the

respondent ministry had provided a copy of the affidavit dated

May 18, 2015 and July 12, 2016 to the petitioner.

(xiii) It is stated that the respondent no. 1 after pointing out the

alleged violation of the Sports Code has never defended its

stand on those points of alleged violation by respondent no. 2.

Respondent No. 1 maintained its complete silence over the

points raised in their letter dated February 4, 2016 after receipt

of representation from the respondent no. 2 through respondent

no. 3 vide letter dated February 4,2016. The respondent no. 1

has gone upto the extent that they have concealed the report of

the Director (Sports) who conducted two hearings on the

direction of this Court vide its orders dated April 22, 2016 and

filed an affidavit on July 12, 2016 in WP (C) 3314/2016.

However, respondent no. 1 has not reiterated or defended those

points of alleged violations in their affidavit dated July 12,

2016. Those points are completely withdrawn by respondent

no. 1 which were used as a tool for rejecting the election report

submitted by the respondent no. 2. However, the Returning

Officer a retired Judge and Govt. Observer appointed by the

Respondent No. 1 who were physically present as neutral

officials, have not given any adverse report to the respondent

no. 1 rather the Returning Officer has mentioned that the

election was held in a transparent manner and as per Sports

Code. Moreover, the Observer appointed by the respondent

ministry for the election of the respondent no. 2 held on

November 29, 2015 at Guwahati and who was present during

the election on November 29, 2015 as representative of the

respondent ministry has also not given any adverse reports to

the respondent ministry.

(xiv) It is stated that the entire WP (C)/5684 is based on letter

dated February 4, 2016 issued by the respondent No.l Govt. of

India, Ministry of Sports and from the above narrated points the

respondent No.1 is unable to defend its letter dated February 04,

2016 and / or the points alleged.

30. The respondent No.1 has also filed two affidavits on

August 24, 2016 and October 24, 2016 wherein apart from

reiterating the stand already taken in W.P.(C) No. 3314/2016, it is

also stated that the faction of AICF lead by Mr. S. Udaya Kumar

had conducted election of AICF on May 15, 2016 at Hyderabad

and submitted its report, in spite of the fact that they were well

aware of the hearing held with both the groups as per the

direction of this Court and the matter was sub judice. According

to the respondent No.1, the record shows that although Mr. S.

Udaya Kumar claims to have been appointed as Acting General

Secretary by the Working Committee, yet no authentic orders

have been produced. His taking over the report bears only his

own signatures. No signatures of Mr. P.S. Bachher have been

observed in that report. The notice of Special General Body

Meeting issued by Mr. S. Udaya Kumar does not have the

approval of the President and thus the entire exercise of the

election carried out by Mr. S. Udaya Kumar on May 15, 2016 at

Hyderabad is of no significance. It is also stated, the elections

held at Guwahati and Hyderabad have not been considered as

valid. Therefore, the respondent No.1 has rightly directed the

Federation to hold the elections afresh in a fair and transparent

manner through the process in line with the provision of the

Sports Code.

31. The petitioner in W.P.(C) 3314/2016 is represented by

Mr. V.D. Narayan. It is his submission that the impugned order

dated February 4, 2016 declaring the elections of All India

Carrom Federation held on November 29, 2015 is invalid on all

grounds. According to him, the premise on which the impugned

order was passed are (i) as per the Sports Code, the President /

General Secretary of the Federation shall prepare a list of

authorized representative(s) of the members, but the same was

not prepared by the President / General Secretary of the

Federation. This necessitated the Returning Officer to prepare the

Electoral College and hence there is a violation of the election

guidelines of the Sports Code from the beginning; (ii) further

vide letter dated July 5, 2015, AICF has informed that Mr. P.S.

Bachher, the General Secretary of the Federation was suspended

by the Working Committee and Mr. S. Udaya Kumar will be

working as Incharge / Acting General Secretary.

32. According to Mr. V.D. Narayan, the ground (i) is

factually incorrect since Electoral College was prepared by

General Secretary of AICF as required by the Sports Code. In so

far as ground (ii) above is concerned, it is his contention that the

same is also factually incorrect. According to him, respondent

no.1 makes all correspondences with the National Sports

Federation through its General Secretary / President. Hence, any

correspondence, which is received by respondent no.1 from any

person other than President / General Secretary of the Federation

cannot be treated as communication of that Federation. In the

present case, Ministry had recorded the names of President and

General Secretary of AICF and intimated to the General

Secretary of AICF vide its order dated October 12, 2012. Mr.

V.D. Narayan also stated that the impugned communication dated

February 04, 2016 is not proceeded by any show cause notice to

the petitioner to meet the allegations made therein and hence in

violation of principles of natural justice. He in his submission

that Mr. Bachher was the General Secretary has referred to the

letter dated July 5, 2015 to state that the said letter confirms that

even the letterhead used by Mr. S. Udaya Kumar, respondent

no.2 finds mention the name of Mr. Bachher as General Secretary

and Mr. Rakibul Hussain as President. Since none of them had

signed the letter, the said communication cannot be treated as a

communication from AICF. In fact, it is his submission that

respondent no. 1 never took cognizance of the letter dated July 5,

2015 before or after the election. However, it was used for

issuing the impugned order only. He stated records also confirm

that respondent no. 1 never communicated with Mr. S. Udaya

Kumar as Acting General Secretary. It is clear from the letter

dated February 4, 2016 which has been addressed to the General

Secretary and not Acting General Secretary. Even the

correspondence between Mr. Bachher, the then General Secretary

of AICF and Mr. A.K. Patro, the Under Secretary of respondent

No.1, who issued the impugned letter dated February 4, 2016

shows that the respondent no. 1 had 'continued to recognize Mr.

Bachher as General Secretary between July 5, 2015 and

November 29, 2015. In this regard, he draws my attention to the

affidavit filed by the petitioner at Page 818 wherein reference is

made to the following correspondence between Mr. Bachher and

Mr. Patro:

(i) Letter of Mr. A.K Patro issuing NOC on August 10, 2015

for International Carrom Tournament to be held in India / New

Delhi.

(ii) Letter of Mr. Patro dated November 3, 2015 to the

General Secretary, AICF on appointment of Government

Observer for election to be held on November 29, 2015 at

Guwahati. The Government Observer appointed by respondent

no. 1 asking certain documents from Mr. Bachher, General

Secretary, AICF.

33. Mr. Narayan also states that filing of the writ petition by

Mr. S. Udaya Kumar being W.P.(C) 8753/2015 seeking

directions against respondent No.l to the extent (a) record the

suspension of Mr. P.S. Bachher (b) to recognize Mr. S. Udaya

Kumar as the Acting General Secretary (c) stay on the Annual

General Body Meeting convened by Mr. Bachher on September

13, 2015 at Guwahati was dismissed as withdrawn on September

11, 2015 with liberty to avail all remedies under the Civil Law. In

this regard he also states that the fact that the writ petition has

been filed by Kumar for the reliefs already stated above would

demonstrate that Union of India was not recognizing Mr. S.

Udaya Kumar as the General Secretary of AICF.

34. Mr. Narayan also submitted that the respondent no. 1 on

October 6, 2015 i.e. three months after the receipt of the letter

dated July 5, 2015 sought a confirmation from, the President,

AICF on the suspension of Mr. Bachher, General Secretary,

AICF. Mr. Rakibul Hussain, President of AICF sent a reply vide

his letter dated October 14, 2015 mentioning therein that the

meeting convened by Mr. Kumar is not only illegal but also an

act of anti federation activity. According to Mr. Narayan, Mr.

Hussain had categorically mentioned that Mr. Bachher is the

General Secretary of AICF and still has confidence of more than

2/3rd members of AICF which is evident from the meeting of the

General Council of AICF held on September 3, 2015. That apart,

it is the submission of Mr. Narayan that 100% eligible members

of the AICF including Mr. S. Udaya Kumar who was claiming to

be Acting General Secretary participated in the election process

by responding to the election notice dated October 14, 2015

issued by Mr. Bachher, the then General Secretary. He submitted

that the International Carrom Federation, the Parent Body of

AICF had also approved the election held on November 29, 2015

after investigating the entire matter and had issued letter of

recognition to newly elected body led by Mr. Rakibul Hussain as

President and Mr. V.D. Narayan as General Secretary. He

stresses on the fact that before the issuance of the approval letter

of recognition to the newly elected office bearers, international

body looked into the entire controversy created by respondent no.

1 by issuing the impugned letter dated February 4, 2016 during

their visit to India in February, 2016. He stated, no one has ever

challenged the election dated November 29, 2015 in any court of

law till date. In any case, it is his submission that pursuant to the

order passed by this court on April 22, 2016 directing the

respondent no. 1 to conduct the enquiry after meeting the

petitioner on April 28, 2016 at 15:00 Hrs. and produce the record

before the court on May 18, 2016, the Director (Sports) of

respondent no. 1, who conducted the enquiry, submitted his

report on May 13, 2016. The Director (Sports) in his report has

categorically come to a conclusion that (1) there is no bar as per

the Sports Code to hold elections before due date; (2) the grounds

of issuance of letter dated February 4, 2016 by Department of

Sports, are not found to be correct based on the documents

submitted by Mr. V.D. Narayan in the hearing. So the order

dated February 4, 2016 has to be tested only on the basis of the

report furnished by the Director (Sports) and it is clear, the

election having been validly held, could not have been annulled

by respondent no. 1. He stated after the declaration of the result,

the petitioner has taken over as the General Secretary of the AICF

and has been discharging the functions as the General Secretary,

as he has organized many tournaments in different parts of the

country.

35. In view of his submissions, he seeks the granting of the

reliefs prayed in the writ petition.

36. Mr. Bhagwan Swarup Shukla, learned CGSC appearing

for the respondent no. 1 has drawn my attention to the affidavits

filed by respondent no. 1, Govt. of India including the one at page

897, the details of which have already been reproduced above

only to contend that pursuant to the report submitted by Director

(Sports), Secretary (Sports) was of the view that a senior officer

examines the various facts and issues and suggests the way to be

followed as per Sports Code provisions and accordingly directed

the Additional Secretary and Financial Advisor to examine and

advise him in time. Accordingly, Additional Secretary and

Financial Advisor of the Ministry submitted her report on June

21, 2016, wherein, Additional Secretary inter-alia stated that the

Government observer appointed by the Ministry for the elections

held on November 29, 2015 at Guwahati has submitted his report,

that the elections were not held on time and out of eligible 60

members only 33 members collected their election ballot and

casted their vote. Reference is also made about the non-

participation 13 State Associations in the election process. The

participation of Orissa state is also not known, though they are

the member. Mr. Shukla stated that the record reveals that various

important documents relating to elections like notice of elections,

list of nominated candidates, declaration of results etc. show a

mismatch of the signatures of the Returning Officer. Many of the

important documents, declaration of results and counting of votes

also do not have signatures of the observer. Hence, the Additional

Secretary observed that the manipulation and forging of the

records and signatures could not be ruled out. Mr. Shukla has

drawn my attention to the notings of the Additional Secretary at

Pages 723 to 727 of the paper book. He states that the conclusion

of the respondent no. 1 in the impugned order with regard to the

holding of election other than at Guwahati in any case cannot be

contested by the petitioner.

37. Mr. Aseem Mehrotra, learned counsel appearing for the

respondent no.2 in his submissions has reiterated the stand taken

by respondent no. 2 in his counter-affidavit and the same can be

summed up in the following manner:

(i) The elections held on November 29, 2015 at Guwahati

are contrary to and in violation of the norms of National Sports

Code.

(ii) They were conducted in unfair and undemocratic manner.

(iii) The entire election process was subverted and manipulated

by the President Mr. Rakibul Hussain, who was then serving as

a Minister in the Assam Government. The members of the All

India Carrom Federation, who were against, Mr. Hussain were

threatened with dire consequences. When all the measures of

intimidation failed, members of the All India Carrom Federation

who opposed Mr. Hussain were restrained from voting and they

were forced to vacate the election venue. The said members

subsequently left the election venue under the protection of

police and were escorted by the police officials. Mr. Hussain

could not get majority in the election as Mr. Hussain's group got

only 30 votes out of 60 votes. Four members who were coerced

to vote in favour of Mr. Hussain's group challenged the entire

procedure of the elections vide complaints dated December 2,

2015 and December 22, 2015.

(iv) Even otherwise, Mr. Hussain who was a Minister in the

Assam Government was contesting for the post of the President

for the second term and he was again elected as the President in

the election held on November 29, 2015. The election was ex-

facie illegal in view of the Ministry of Education and Social

Welfare, Government of India letter dated September; 20, 1975,

which provided the tenure of the office bearer of Sports

Federation, and which also stated that office bearer who has

completed one term shall only be deemed to have been elected

if he / she secures majority of not less than 2/3 votes of the

members of the National Sports Federation Association

concerned.

(v) The Orissa State Carrom Federation which was an

affiliated member of respondent no. 1 was not included in the

Electoral College and was restrained from voting. Further

Association of Bengal which is an affiliated State member of

respondent no. 1 requested for change of Electoral College as

permitted under Rule 4 (4) of Model Election Guidelines. The

same was not allowed. Two government servants namely Mr.

Mukul Jha and Mr. S. Lyngdoh were got elected in violation of

Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports OM dated February

4,2010.

(vi) Mr. V.D. Narayan who, purports to have been elected as

General Secretary of the Federation was ineligible to hold the

said post along with two other members of public sector

undertakings who took part in the aforesaid election without

taking NOC from their employers respectively.

38. According to Mr. Mehrotra, LIC of India has made a

similar rule for its employees. Perusal of which would reveal that

Mr. Narayan was not eligible to contest the election. This aspect

of non-eligibility of Mr. Narayan was also brought to the notice

of respondent No.l in letter dated February 9, 2016 as also

regards Mr. Rakibul Hussain. The election of office bearers of

respondent no. 1 which was held on November 29, 2015 at

Guwahati were postponed wrongfully by about an hour without

issuing a notice to the members of the Electoral College; voting

compartments were not provided; ballot boxes were not sealed;

attendance sheet of the voters was not authenticated by Returning

Officer or Government Observer; the Government observer did

not sign or certify Form 14 and Form 15; results were declared in

different format other than prescribed Form 15; various important

documents pertaining to the election has shown a .mismatch of

signatures of the Returning Officer; scrutiny of nominations was

not undertaken in violation of election circular of General

Secretary dated October 14, 2015 regarding remittance of annual

subscription in violation of other provisions of Sports code;

election notice was circulated by the suspended General

Secretary Mr. P.S. Bachher; the Electoral College was not

prepared by the General Secretary, but nominations were re-

invited by the Returning Officer with different schedule to

prepare Electoral College; Form-14 was neither prepared nor

issued / published immediately after the scrutiny but was

circulated through e-mail on November 21,2015.

39. Mr. Mehrotra had also argued that the report of Director

(Sports) of respondent no. 1 having been further considered by

the Additional Secretary and Financial Advisor of respondent no.

1, who had still opined that the elections conducted were in

violation of guidelines of the Sports Code and the same being not

at all fair and transparent had justified the direction of the

respondent no. 1 directing the AICF to hold elections in fair and

transparent manner by the office bearers elected in the election

held in 2012. He stated, these are the developments subsequent

to passing of order dated February 4, 2016 and that too pursuant

to the directions given by this Court on April 22, 2016 in W.P.(C)

3314/2016. The said report even though subsequent to the

impugned order cannot be overlooked by this Court while

adjudicating the dispute. In other words he contested the

submission made by Mr. Narayan that the impugned order needs

to be tested only on the grounds stated therein and not otherwise.

In this regard he has relied upon the following judgments of the

Supreme Court:

(i) Chairman, All India Railway Recruitment Board and

Anr. v. K. Shyam Kumar and Ors. (2010) 6 SCC 614;

(ii) PRP Exports and Ors. v. Chief Secretary, Government

of Tamil Nadu and Ors. (2014) 13 SCC 692.

40. Mr. Mehrotra states that the impugned order needs to be

upheld as the same is in violation of the National Sports Code by

relying upon the judgment of this Court in the case Indian

Olympic Association v. Union of India (2014) SCC Online

Delhi 2967.

41. Mr. Jai Sahai Endlaw, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner in W.P.(C) 5684/2016 in his submissions only

reiterated the stand of the petitioner in the writ petition and

pressed for the reliefs as prayed for in the petition. Mr. Ajay

Digpaul, learned CGSC appearing for the respondent no. 1 in the

said writ petition also reiterates the stand of the respondent no. 1

in its affidavit. In so far respondent nos. 2 to 5 are concerned, the

contents of the detailed affidavit have already been referred

above. According to Mr. Narayan, the elections at Guwahati held

on November 29, 2015 were just and proper and the elections in

Hyderabad are illegal and seeks the dismissal of the writ petition.

42. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, before I

deal with the submissions so advanced by the representative of

the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents, it is

necessary to refer to some of the orders passed by this Court; the

Division bench of this Court and the Supreme Court. On May 17,

2017, an application being CM No. 18735/2017 was filed by the

petitioner, AICF which was dismissed. Against the said order, the

petitioner filed an LPA being No. 407/2017. On May 29, 2017,

the Division Bench in that LPA had passed the following order:-

"5. When the matter was taken up on the last date of hearing, i.e. 26.05.2017, we had suggested that the Court may appoint an Ad-hoc Committee with representation of the petitioner, the other faction represented by respondent No.2, ex-players, and with a senior officer in the Ministry of Sports so that the functioning of the Federation is not jeopardized till the

writ petition is disposed of."

6. In that respect, Mr. Shukla had tendered, in Court, an email communication dated 26.05.2017 received from the Under Secretary, Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, Government of India Mr. A.K. Patro. The said communication states that the matter had been discussed with the Secretary (Sports) Dr. Sagar Preet Hooda. The respondent No.1 is agreeable that the Director (Sports) may head the Ad-hoc Committee. It was also stated that the two ex-players - one male and one female, could also be part of the Committee.

7. Since the Ad-hoc Committee would function for and on behalf of the appellant Federation, it is agreed that Mr. VD. Narayan and respondent No.2, namely, Mr. S. Udayakumar be also made a part of the said Ad-hoc Committee. We are inclined to include Mr. V. D. Narayan as well as the respondent No.2 as a part of the Ad-hoc Committee, also for the reason that the International Federation corresponds with and recognizes the Indian Federation while functioning through its office bearers - whose particulars are communicated to the international body. It is informed that, presently, Mr. V.D. Narayan is the person authorized to deal with the international body. The two ex-players whose consent has been taken for inclusion in the Ad-hoc Committee are Mr. A. Maria Irudyam (Mobile No.9841306430) and Ms. Kunja Phanse

(Mobile Nos. 9427329822, 9427033879).

8. Accordingly, the Ad-hoc Committee is constituted by this Court consisting of the Director (Sports) as the Chairperson; Mr. A. Maria Irudyam and Ms. Kunja Phanse as the two ex-players male and female respectively; Mr. VD. Narayan and Mr. Uday Kumar as the other members. The Committee shall function under the chairmanship of the Director (Sports). The decisions shall be taken by the Committee preferably unanimously. However, in case there is a tie, the decision shall be taken by the Chairman, i.e. the Director (Sports), who shall have the casting vote.

9. The decisions of the Committee shall be deemed to be decisions of the Federation, and in case any communication is required to be addressed to the International Federation regarding the said decisions, Mr. V.D. Narayan shall appropriately send a communication in terms of the decisions taken by the Committee. The Federation shall be deemed to be recognized in respect of the decisions taken by the Committee on its behalf In accordance with the decision taken by the Committee, Mr. V.D. Narayan shall issue the Railway Concession Forms and the Prospectus to the players.

10. The functioning of the Committee shall not lead to any financial burden on the Government or its members, and all the expenses incurred by the

Committee towards holding its meetings shall be to the account of the Federation. The Committee shall, in its functioning, keep in mind the mandate of the Federation; the calendar of the Federation; as well as the national and international obligations in relation to the sports of Carrom.

11. The first meeting of the Committee shall be held on 09.06.2017 at 11:30 a.m. in the office of the Director (Sports). No further communication/ notice in respect of the said meeting shall be required to be given to the appellant or respondent No.2. However, this order shall be communicated to the ex-player members by this Court as well as by the appellant under recorded delivery within four days.

12. This Committee has been formed with the consent of all the parties present. It is made clear that constitution of the Committee shall not vest any rights in either of the contesting factions/ parties and, while formulating this Committee, this Court has not reflected on the merits of the claims of either of the two factions. It is hoped that the Committee shall function keeping in view the interest of the sport of Carrom and its players in India. The Committee shall exist till the writ petition is disposed-off, and appropriate orders are passed in the writ proceedings in relation to the functioning of the Federation by the Court.

13. The appeal stands disposed-off in the aforesaid

terms."

43. The LPA 407/2017 was finally decided on August 25,

2017 wherein the Division Bench in Paras 15 to 17 had passed

the following order:

"15. In these circumstances, since the hearing of the writ petition is getting delayed on account of pendency and the sport of carom and the interests of players is getting affected for the past about 17 months, due to lack of clear direction as to who will administer the affairs of the Federation, . we are inclined to stay the operation of the orders dated 04.02.2016 and 08.02.2016 issued by the Govt. of India, Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports till the learned Single Judge takes up either the hearing of the stay application and / or the writ petition itself.

16. Accordingly, the appellant Federation shall, till further orders passed by the learned Single Judge in the writ proceedings or any other appropriate proceedings, continue to exercise it powers and jurisdiction in relation to the sport of carom. The respondent / UOI is directed to take corrective steps in view of this order in all aspects including in respect of issuance of railway concession forms, etc. The respondent / UOI shall in the interim, also take steps to upload on relevant websites the results communicated by the Dy. Director, SAI, EC, Kolkata Govt. Observer,

of All India Carrom Federation Gen. Election 2015, Guwahati, and pass orders in respect of the recognition of the appellant Federation and its office bearers, as per the election results of 29.11.2015.

17. We make it clear that the observations made by us in this order are made purely for the purpose of examining the reliefs to be granted in the present appeal. The learned Single Judge shall be free to take an independent view in the matter after hearing the parties."

44. It is noted that against this order, respondent no.2 had

filed an SLP before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court

disposed of the SLP on July 16, 2018 with the following order:-

"Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are only inclined to request the High Court to dispose of the writ petition within a period of six weeks, without being influenced by the directions / observations made in the orders passed in LPA No. 407/2017 and Review Petition No. 325/2017. With the aforesaid request, the Special Leave Petition is disposed of."

45. It may be relevant to state here that two more LPAs were

filed by the petitioner herein AICF; being LPA 102/2017 and

LPA 310/2018. In LPA 102/2017 the challenge was to the order

dated January 16, 2017 passed in CM. No. 1585/2017 in W.P.(C)

3314/2016 wherein this Court on an application filed by the

petitioner had issued notice and sought for the replies. The said

LPA was disposed of by the Division Bench directing this Court

to dispose of CM. No. 5185/2017. The LPA being 310/2018 was

filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated April 20, 2018

whereby the application of the petitioner being CM. No.

14137/2016 for stay of the impugned order dated February 4,

2016 was disposed of on May 28, 2018 by the Division Bench

requesting this Court to decide the writ petition on merits finally

at the earliest convenience within two months from the receipt of

the order. Having noted the orders passed by the Division Bench

and the Supreme Court, the parties / their counsel have been

heard.

46. Mr. V.D. Narayan in his submissions has contested the

impugned order dated February 4, 2016 on the ground that Mr.

P.B. Bachher was never suspended and the Electoral College was

prepared by the General Secretary. In support of his submissions,

Mr. Narayan has stated the following:

1. Letter dated July 5, 2015 confirms that Mr. S. Uday Kumar, respondent no.2 used a letterhead which finds mention the name of Mr. Bachher as General

Secretary and Mr. Rakibul Hussain as President.

2. Respondent no.1 has never communicated with Mr. S. Uday Kumar as Acting General Secretary. Even the correspondence between Mr. Bachher and Mr. A.K. Patrol, Under Secretary shows that respondent no.1 continued to recognize Mr. Bachher as General Secretary between July 5, 2015 and November 29, 2015. In this regard, he referred to letter dated August 10, 2015 of Mr. Patro issuing NOC for International Carrom Tournament, letter of Mr. Patro dated November 3, 2015 to the General Secretary, AICF.

3. Filing of the writ petition by Mr. S. Uday Kumar being W.P.(C) 8735/2015 seeking directions to the extent recording the suspension of Mr. Bachher and to recognize him as Acting General Secretary confirms that Mr. Kumar was not recognized as the General Secretary of the AICF.

4. On October 6, 2015, respondent no.1 had sought clarification from the President, AICF on suspension of Mr. Bachher, General Secretary, AICF.

5. Mr. Rakibul Hussaion, President of AICF sent a reply dated October 14, 2015 mentioning therein that a meeting convened by Mr. Kumar was illegal. He categorically stated that Mr. Bachher is the General Secretary of AICF.

6. Mr. Kumar who was claiming to be the Acting General Secretary participated in the election process by responding to election notice dated October 14, 2015 issued by Mr. Bachher, the then General Secretary.

47. I note the only stand of Mr. S. Udaya Kumar (Respondent

No.2) is that Mr. Bachher has been suspended by the Working

Committee. The Working Committee had directed Mr. S. Udaya

Kumar to be the Incharge / Acting General Secretary. Reliance

was placed on various documents like minutes of the Working

Committee dated May 30, 2015; notice dated June 6, 2015 stated

to have been issued to Mr. Bachher; the report of the Enquiry

Committee appointed by the Working Committee on suspension

of Mr. Bachher; e-mail dated July 5, 2015 sent to Mr. Bachher

informing his suspension. It appears that pursuant to these

communications only, respondent no.1 issued letter dated

October 6, 2015 to the President, AICF seeking his comments on

the suspension of Mr. Bachher as General Secretary, to which, as

transpired during hearing before the Director (Sports), a letter

dated October 14, 2015 was written by the President, AICF

stating that Mr. Bachher is still continuing as General Secretary.

That apart, the very fact that Mr. S. Udaya Kumar had

participated in the election process as a representative of

Pondicherry Association, pursuant to a notice dated October 14,

2015 issued by Mr. Bachher would itself show that Mr. Kumar

could not have contested the position of Mr. Bachher as the

General Secretary. Further, he filed a writ petition before this

court inter-alia seeking for reliefs, which included recognizing

him as the General Secretary of the AICF which was finally

withdrawn. The filing of the writ petition itself would reveal that

he was not being recognized as the General Secretary. It is also

seen that the Electoral College was prepared by Mr. Bachher as is

contemplated under the Rules. So it must follow, Mr. Bachher

was the General Secretary. To that extent, the ground in the

impugned letter dated February 04, 2016, as contended by

Director (Sports) is incorrect. But on the other issues raised by

Mr. S. Udaya Kumar before him, the Director (Sports) observed

that Department of Sports may examine those relating to age and

tenure, election procedure followed etc. as per the provisions of

the Sports Code. It is noted that the report of Director (Sports)

Mr. Vivek Narayan was considered by the Secretary of the

Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, who opined that a senior

officer examines the various facts and the issues and suggest the

way to be followed as per the Sports Code provisions.

Accordingly, the aspect of the election was considered by the

Additional Secretary and Financial Advisor, who on detail

analysis found anomalies in the elections held in Guwahati. Her

observations are reproduced as under:-

"10. Based on study of records and above mentioned observations, it is important to draw attention of the Ministry to the many anomalies in the record. The elections held at Guwahati on 29.11.2015 on the basis of Special General Body meeting. However, as per the model election guidelines to be followed by National Sports Federations Part 3(2) mention:-

"elections shall be held at the Annual General Council meeting in accordance with a procedure prescribed hereinafter, from amongst the representatives of the permanent States/UTs/Boards/Institutions."

However, it is seen that Guwahati elections were vitiated to that extent. It is also pertinent to note from the report of the observer Sh. L. Tiken Singh that elections were not held on time and out of the eligible 60 members only 33 members collected their election ballot and casted the vote. It is seen that 13 State Associations did not participate in the election process. The participation of Orissa State is not known from the records, though they are a Member. The records also show that the various important documents relating to elections like notice of elections, list of nominated candidates, declaration of

results etc show a mis-match of the signatures of the Returning Officer. Many of these important documents like declaration of results and counting of votes also do not have the signatures of the Observer Sh. Tiken Singh, who was appointed by the Ministry. Thus, manipulation and forging of records and signatures cannot be ruled out.

11. Records also show although Sh. Uday Kumar claims to have been appointed as acting General Secretary by the working Committee yet no authentic orders have been produced. His taking over report bears only his own signatures. No signatures are seen by Mr. P.S. Bachher. The notice of the Special General Body meeting issued by him (held at Vadodara) does not have the approval of the President of the Federation and thus the entire exercise of elections carried out by him is of no significance and the Ministry may not give adequate cognizance.

12. In view of the above many anomalies it is very clear that elections held at Guwahati violated the guidelines of the Sports Code and the election process was not at all fair and transparent. Thus the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports has rightly directed them to hold the elections in a fair and transparent manner by the office bearers elected in the elections held in 2012. The matter is already before the Court and next date of hearing is 19th July, 2016. The Ministry is advised to maintain status-quo until the case is decided."

48. Suffice to state, the above conclusion has been accepted

by the Competent Authority. It may be stated here that the

impugned communication dated February 04, 2016 may have lost

its relevance to some extent but still the conclusion arrived at by

the respondent No.1 through its Additional Secretary and

Financial Advisor with regard to the anomalies found in the

conduct of elections held at Guwahati, and the observation that

the Ministry has rightly directed the AICF to hold elections in a

fair and transparent manner; it is to be seen whether this

conclusion arrived at is justified. The conclusion is for the

following reasons:-

(i) The elections held at Guwahati on November 29, 2015

was on the basis of Special General Body meeting, which is at

variance with the Model Election Guidelines to be followed by

National Sports Federation Part 3(2) which mentions that the

elections shall be held at the Annual General Meeting;

(ii) The report of the Observer, L. Tiken Singh that elections

were not held on time and out of 60 eligible Members only 33

Members collected their election ballot and casted the vote;

(iii) Thirteen State Associations did not participate in the

election process;

(iv) The participation of Orissa State is not known from the

records, though they are a Member;

(v) Various important documents relating to elections like

notice of elections, list of nominated candidates, declaration of

results etc. show a mis-match of the signatures of the Returning

Officer;

(vi) Many documents like declaration of results and counting

of votes also do not have the signatures of the Observer Sh.

Tiken Singh;

(vii) Manipulation and forging of records and signatures

cannot be ruled out.

49. That apart, I have already reproduced the grounds on

which Mr. S. Udaya Kumar in his counter affidavit and Mr.

Mehrotra in his submissions alleged that the elections held at

Guwahati were not transparent and were unfair. No rejoinder to

the same has been filed by the petitioner. In his rejoinder to the

short affidavit of respondent No.1, the petitioner on the starting

of the election process at 11.45 hrs instead of 11 hrs, stated if any

appointed Returning Officer takes more time to start voting

process, the petitioner Federation neither can be blamed nor it can

be treated as violation of guidelines of the Sports Code; (ii) with

regard to voting by 33 voters out of 60 eligible voters, it is the

stand of the petitioner that percentage of voting cannot be

ensured in any election process; (iii) insofar as the Orissa matter

is concerned, as per the Electoral College issued by the then

General Secretary on November 15, 2015 two different groups

sent the names of representatives of Orissa Carrom Association.

Since the matter over the post of General Secretary is pending in

the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bhubaneswar, both

the groups have not been allowed to participate in the said

election.

50. The aforesaid reasoning of the petitioner does not

satisfactorily answer all the grounds on which the Additional

Secretary and Financial Advisor has directed the conduct of fresh

elections. Further, the collection of ballots and voting thereof by

33 members only, has no justification and the same may have

materially affected the outcome of the election. Further, in Para

(vii) of the W.P.(C) 3314/2016, it is the case of the petitioner that

office bearers of the Society are elected once in four years at the

Annual General Meeting. So it follows, the elections cannot be

held in special meeting as happened in this case on November 29,

2015. The plea of Mr. Narayan that no-one has challenged the

election of November 29, 2015, is inconsequential as the

Approving Authority, the Government of India i.e. the respondent

No. 1 has not approved the elections, and has directed fresh

elections in a fair and transparent manner. That apart there are

complaints filed on record by one S.K. Sharma dated December

02, 2015 and December 22, 2015, which also throw some light in

the manner in which the elections were held. Taking into account

the totality of facts, it must be held the conclusion arrived at by

the Additional Secretary and Financial Advisor for conduct of

fresh elections by the office bearers elected in the elections held

in the year 2012 is not unreasonable. This I say so as the

objective underlying the process of election is that the persons,

who have the highest mandate, take over the reins of the

Association provided that the process is fair and transparent.

51. The plea of Mr. V.D. Narayan that the principles of

natural justice have been violated and that the order dated

February 04, 2016 needs to be tested on the grounds referred to

therein is concerned, the same is not appealing for the reasons,

firstly there is no provision in the Byelaws, which entail that

respondent No.1 while considering the legality of the election

process need to give any hearing even if the approval is not

granted; secondly after filing of the writ petition, an order dated

April 22, 2016 was passed by this Court inter-alia directing the

respondent No.1 to look into the matter and make further

enquiries as to the claim of the petitioner and repercussion, if any

of holding election before due date or any bar thereto. As

directed by this Court, Mr. V.D. Narayan and the respondent

No.2, the contesting parties herein were given hearing by the

Director (Sports) Mr. Vivek Narayan. The parties have filed

documents/pleadings before Mr. Narayan. Upon hearing Mr.

Narayan had come to the conclusion, as narrated above. Based

on the same record / material, even Additional Secretary and

Financial Advisor takes a view for fresh elections by the

Members elected in the elections of 2012. So the matter of

elections having been considered from the perspective of Sports

Code / fairness, and conclusion is for fresh elections no prejudice

has been caused to the petitioner while passing the order dated

February 04, 2016. The irregularity, if any stands cured.

52. On the plea of Mr. Narayan that the order has to be tested

on the grounds stated in the letter dated February 04, 2016 is

concerned, the said proposition of law is not in dispute but this

Court while adjudicating a dispute, is within its right to take into

consideration the subsequent events / developments that have

taken place that too in terms of the direction of this court and

draw a conclusion whether the decision of the respondent No.1

directing the conduct of fresh elections is justified, which this

Court, in the facts of this case finds so.

53. Mr. Mehrotra is justified in relying upon the judgment of

the Supreme Court in the case of PRP Exports and Others

(supra), wherein the Supreme Court in para 8 held as under:-

"8. Shri Harish Salve, learned senior counsel appearing for the Petitioner, submitted that he is more concerned with the first question and arguments were advanced by him as well as Shri C. Sundaram, learned senior counsel appearing for the State, on that point. In our view, the Division Bench of the High Court is right in examining the subsequent events as well in a case where larger public interest is involved. This Court in All India Railway Recruitment Board v. K. Shyam Kumar [(2010) 6 SCC 614] distinguished Mohinder Singh Gill's case (supra), stating when a larger public interest is involved, the Court can always look into the subsequent events. Relevant paragraph of the judgment is extracted hereinbelow :-

"45. We are of the view that the decision-maker can always rely upon subsequent materials to support the decision already taken when larger public interest is involved. This Court in Madhyamic Shiksha Mandal, M.P. v. Abhilash Shiksha Prasar Samiti found no

irregularity in placing reliance on a subsequent report to sustain the cancellation of the examination conducted where there were serious allegations of mass copying. The principle laid down in Mohinder Singh Gill case is not applicable where larger public interest is involved and in such situations, additional grounds can be looked into to examine the validity of an order. The finding recorded by the High Court that the report of CBI cannot be looked into to examine the validity of the order dated 4-6-2004, cannot be sustained.

54. Mr. Mehrotra is also justified in relying upon the

judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Chairman, All

India Railway Recruitment Board and Another (supra), wherein

the Supreme Court in para 45 held as under:-

"45. We are of the view that the decision maker can always rely upon subsequent materials to support the decision already taken when larger public interest is involved. This Court in Madhyamic Shiksha Mandal, M.P. v. Abhilash Shiksha Prasar Samiti and Others, (1998) 9 SCC 236 found no irregularity in placing reliance on a subsequent report to sustain the cancellation of the examination conducted where there were serious allegations of mass copying. The principle laid down in Mohinder Singh Gill's case is not applicable where larger public interest is involved and in such situations, additional grounds can be looked into to examine

the validity of an order. Finding recorded by the High Court that the report of the CBI cannot be looked into to examine the validity of order dated 04.06.2004, cannot be sustained."

55. In view of my above discussion and upholding letter

dated February 04, 2016 to the extent it directs conduct of fresh

elections, this Court is of the view that to ensure elections are

held by the Members elected in the elections of the year 2012 in a

transparent, free and fair manner, strictly in accordance with the

guidelines of the National Sports Code / Byelaws, the following

directions need to be issued:-

(i) The Management Committee of the year 2012 shall

continue to be the Management Committee of the All India

Carrom Federation till the new Management Committee is

appointed pursuant to the elections to be held in terms of this

order.

(ii) Justice R.V. Easwar, a Retired Judge of this Court (D-41

Hauz Khas, New Delhi, 95606899997) is appointed as the

Observer to observe the conduct of the elections. He shall be

paid an amount of `1.75 lakh excluding any out of pocket

expenses for transportation, Secretarial Services (if any) etc.

which shall be reimbursed as per actuals. The aforesaid amount

shall be paid by the AICF;

(iii) The President in consultation with the Observer shall

appoint the Returning Officer.

(iv) The venue of the elections shall be decided by the

Returning Officer in consultation with the Observer. The

elections shall be completed on or before 10 weeks effective from

16th August, 2018. The election results along with the report of

the Observer (if any) shall be submitted to respondent No.1 for its

approval.

(v) The Management Committee of 2012 shall inform the

ICF about this order.

56. The Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3314/2016 is disposed of as

such.

57. In view of my conclusion above, the prayers made in

W.P.(C) No. 5684/2016 do not survive and the petition need to be

dismissed.

CM Nos. 38513-38514/2017 in W.P.(C) 3314/2016 (for interim directions) Dismissed as infructuous.

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J AUGUST 06, 2018/ak/jg

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter