David John vs The Kerala Olympic Association
2022 Latest Caselaw 1333 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
     TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 12TH MAGHA, 1943
                        WP(C) NO. 11790 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          DAVID JOHN
          AGED 42 YEARS, SON OF P.D JOHNSON,
          PUDUKADAN HOUSE,
          CHEROOR ROAD, THRISSUR - 680020
          BY ADVS.
          PRAVEEN.H.
          M.V.VIPINDAS
          AMAL DEV D
          T.T.SHANIBA
          K.S.SMITHA
          SRILAXMI SURESH
          G.HARIHARAN


RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE KERALA OLYMPIC    ASSOCIATION
          OLYMPIC BHAVAN, MP    APPAN ROAD,
          TC29 3647,
          VAZHUTHACAUD,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM    - 695014
          REPRESENTED BY ITS    SECRETARY
    2     STATE OF KERALA,
          REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY
          DEPARTMENT OF SPORTS AND YOUTH AFFAIRS,
          ROOM NO. 395, IST FLOOR, MAIN BLOCK, SECRETARIAT
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695001.


          BY ADV. THOMAS ABRAHAM



     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 11790 OF 2021

                               2



               P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
             -------------------------------
             W.P.(C)No. 11790 of 2021
            --------------------------------
    Dated this the 1st day of February, 2022

                     JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following

prayers:

"(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order commanding the respondent association to ensure that all sports organisations affiliated by it are registered as per Section 31 of the Kerala Sports act;

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order commanding the 2 nd respondent to take up Exhibit P3 representation and take a decision there on as expeditiously as possible;

(iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order restraining the 2 nd respondent association from affiliating any sports organisation which is not registered under Section 31 of the Kerala Sports Act;

(iv) To pass such orders or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice." WP(C) NO. 11790 OF 2021

2. According to the petitioner as per

Section 31 of the Kerala Sports Act, all sports

organisations have to be registered under the

said provisions, failing which, they will be

disqualified under Section 43 of the Act. It is

contended by the petitioner that Section 31

provides stringent provisions to qualify for

registration under the Act as per the amendment

brought in to the said provision in the year 2015.

It is the further case of the petitioner that,

without taking note of the amended provisions,

many sports associations in the State have not

qualified themselves to get registered under the

Act. It is the case of the petitioner that the 1 st

respondent is the Kerala Olympic Association

which is the official body in the State that selects

sports persons from Kerala for selection to the

Olympics and such other international events. WP(C) NO. 11790 OF 2021

Ext.P2 is the list of sports associations that are

affiliated to the 1st respondent. The petitioner is

the joint secretary of the Kerala State Rifle

Association and is aware of the fact that it is not

registered under the Sports Act, still finds

affiliation with the 1st respondent. It is stated by

the petitioner that there are many other

associations who are not registered under the

Sports Act. The grievance of the petitioner is

that the 1st respondent is duty bound to ensure

that all its affiliated sports organisations are

registered under the Kerala State Sports Act.

Hence this writ petition is filed.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the

petitioner, the learned counsel appearing for the 1 st

respondent and the learned Government Pleader.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner

reiterated his contentions in the writ petition. On WP(C) NO. 11790 OF 2021

the other hand the learned counsel appearing for the

1st respondent submitted that the 1st respondent is

not bound by the provisions of the Kerala Sports Act.

The counsel submitted that the Sports council has to

do the needful and the 1st respondent is not in a

position to give registration to the associations. The

counsel also submitted that the prayers in the writ

petition may not be allowed and the Sports council

and the Government is the proper authority to do

the needful in this case.

5. I considered the contentions of the

petitioner and the respondents. The main prayer of

the petitioner is to issue a direction to the 1st

respondent to ensure that all sports organisations

affiliated by it are registered under Section 31 of the

Kerala Sports Act. But on the other hand, the 1 st

respondent has got a case that the Sports council is

the authority to do the needful and the 1 st

respondent is not in a position to do anything in this WP(C) NO. 11790 OF 2021

regard. I think this is a matter to be looked into by

the 2nd respondent. The petitioner can file a

representation before the 2nd respondent within a

time frame and there can be a direction to the 2 nd

respondent to consider the same, after giving an

opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The 2 nd

respondent also get the remarks from the 1 st

respondent also before finalising the matter.

Therefore this writ petition is disposed of in

the following manner:

(i) The petitioner is free to file a

representation narrating his grievance raised in this

writ petition before the 2nd respondent within two

weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment.

(ii) Once such a representation is received,

the 2nd respondent will consider the same and pass

appropriate orders in it, after giving an opportunity

of hearing to the petitioner and the 1st respondent.

WP(C) NO. 11790 OF 2021

(iii) The above exercise should be completed

by the 2nd respondent, as expeditiously as possible,

at any rate, within three months from the date of

receipt of a copy of the representation.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

DM WP(C) NO. 11790 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11790/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER SENT THROUGH EMAIL AND THE INTIMATION ATTACHED TO THE SAID EMAIL WHICH IS A NOTICE REGARDING A MEETING OF THE THRISSUR DISTRICT OLYMPIC ASSOCIATION.

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF SPORTS ASSOCIATIONS AFFILIATED WITH THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT ASSOCIATION.

EXHIBIT P4       TRUE COPY OF THE SCREENSHOT FROM
                 THE    PHONE   OF   THE   PETITIONER

EVIDENCING THE NOTICE SERVED ON HIM IN CONNECTION WITH THE ONLINE MEETING HELD ON 30.05.2021.

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL

//TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE