Kerala State Sports Council vs Kerala Table Tennis Association
2021 Latest Caselaw 22534 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                          PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
 FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 21ST KARTHIKA,
                           1943
                    RP NO. 661 OF 2020
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 28991/2019 OF HIGH
                      COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 1 & 5:

    1     KERALA STATE SPORTS COUNCIL
          YMCA ROAD, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

    2     MERCY KUTTAN ,
          PRESIDENT, KERALA STATE SPORTS COUNCIL, YMCA
          ROAD, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 0001.

         BY ADVS.
         LATHA ANAND
         SRI.M.N.RADHAKRISHNA MENON


RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4:

    1     KERALA TABLE TENNIS ASSOCIATION
          REGIONAL SPORTS CENTRE, KADAVANTHRA, ERNAKULAM,
          KOCHI-682 020, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT MR.
          S.A.S.NAVAS.

    2     STATE OF KERALA,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SPORTS AND YOUTH
          AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

    3     THE TABLE TENNIS FEDERATION OF INDIA,
          1-15,3RD FLOOR, DSIDC COMPLEX, NEAR UDYOG NAGAR
          METRO STATION, ROHTAK ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 041,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

    4     TABLE TENNIS ASSOCIATION OF KERALA,
          YMCA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001, REPRESENTED
          BY ITS SECRETARY
 Review Petition No.661 of 2020
in
W.P.(C) No.28991 of 2019
                                      ..2..




           BY ADVS. SRI.ROSHEN.D.ALEXANDER
           SMT.TINA ALEX THOMAS

           BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. SUNIL V.K.

           BY P.B. KRISHNAN




      THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.11.2021,     THE   COURT      ON    THE    SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 Review Petition No.661 of 2020
in
W.P.(C) No.28991 of 2019
                                    ..3..




                 Review Petition No.661 of 2020
                                    in
                    W.P.(C) No.28991 of 2019
                   --------------------------------------

                                 ORDER

This petition is instituted seeking review of the

judgment dated 30.10.2019 in W.P.(C) No.28991 of 2019.

Respondents 1 and 5 in the writ petition are the review

petitioners. Parties and documents are referred to in this order,

as they appear in the writ petition.

2. The petitioner is the State association in the

field of Table Tennis, presently recognized by the first

respondent, the Kerala State Sports Council (the Sports

Council). The petitioner challenged in the writ petition Ext.P3

show cause notice and Ext.P7 notice of hearing issued by the

Sports Council on its tentative decision to de-recognise the

petitioner Association. The case set out by the petitioner in the

writ petition was that in terms of the Kerala Sports Act (the

Act), it is for the Sports Council to initiate action for de-

recognising an association; that there is no decision by the Review Petition No.661 of 2020 in W.P.(C) No.28991 of 2019 ..4..

Sports Council to initiate proceedings for de-recognising the

petitioner association; that the show cause notice and the

notice of hearing are based on a decision taken by the

Standing Committee of the Sports Council and that the

Standing Committee, which is stated to have taken the

decision to initiate proceedings for de-recognising the

petitioner association has no authority to take such decisions.

3. When the matter came up for hearing, the

learned Senior Counsel for the Sports Council submitted that

the petitioner would be heard on the show cause notice by the

Sports Council itself. In the light of the said submission, this

Court took the view that if the Sports Council proposes to take

a decision on the question of de-recognition of the petitioner

association, it can be presumed that it is at the instance of the

Sports Council that the proceedings for de-recognition has

been initiated and that merely for the reason that a reference

is made about the decision of the Standing Committee in the

show cause notice, the notice issued to the petitioner cannot

be said to be bad in law. Consequently, the writ petition was

disposed of recording the submission made by the learned

Senior Counsel for the Sports Council that the petitioner would Review Petition No.661 of 2020 in W.P.(C) No.28991 of 2019 ..5..

be heard on the show cause notice by the Sports Council itself.

4. The learned Senior Counsel for the first

respondent submitted that review of the judgment is sought

mainly on the ground that the submission made by him that

the petitioner would be heard on the show cause notice by the

Sports Council itself was on a mistaken assumption that only

the Sports Council can take a decision on the show cause

notice issued to the petitioner. It was pointed out that in the

light of Rule 60(1) of the Kerala Sports Rules, 2008, the

Standing Committee of the Sports Council is empowered to

take decisions on questions relating to de-recognition and it

was, therefore, unnecessary for the Sports Council to take a

decision on the show cause notice issued to the petitioner. It

was also pointed out by the learned Senior Counsel that the

Sports Council is a larger body meeting only on one or two

occasions in a year and the affairs of the Sports Council is

being carried on by its Standing Committee and therefore, it is

not practical also for the Sports Council to take all decisions

relating to de-recognition of associations. It was also pointed

out that if the said aspect is not clarified, in the light of the

judgment sought to be reviewed, the Sports Council will be Review Petition No.661 of 2020 in W.P.(C) No.28991 of 2019 ..6..

constrained to take decisions on all issues relating to the de-

recognition of associations.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner however

pointed out that the stand taken by the learned Senior Counsel

that the Standing Committee of the Sports Council is

empowered and authorised to take decisions on the questions

relating to de-recognition is incorrect. Placing reliance on

Section 31A(2) of the Act introduced in terms of the

amendment made to the Sports Act during 2015, the learned

counsel submits that the said statutory provisions specifically

provides that the decisions on questions relating to de-

recognition of associations will have to be taken by the Sports

Council. It was pointed out that the provision in the Rule which

is relied on by the learned Senior Counsel to contend that the

Standing Committee is empowered and authorised to take

decision on questions relating to de-recognition of associations,

is a Rule that was in force prior to the introduction of Section

31A(2) of the Act and the said Rule may not have the force of

law, after the introduction of Section 31A(2) of the Act.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances

of the case, I am of the view that the question as to whether Review Petition No.661 of 2020 in W.P.(C) No.28991 of 2019 ..7..

the Sports Council itself should take a decision on questions

relating to de-recognition of associations is one that should

have been decided in the writ petition. As noted, the said

question has not been decided in the writ petition in the light

of the submission made by the learned Senior Counsel for the

first respondent. Insofar it is contended that the submission

aforesaid, on the basis of which the writ petition was disposed

of, was made on an incorrect assumption of the legal position, I

am of the view that the judgment in the writ petition needs to

be reviewed.

7. In the result, the review petition is allowed and

the judgment dated 30.10.2019 in W.P.(C) No.28991 of 2019 is

recalled. Since the judgment in the writ petition is recalled,

the parties are directed to maintain status quo as on the date

of the judgment, until the same is varied or modified in the writ

petition.

List the writ petition for hearing as per roster.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE ds 15.11.2021