Madras High Court
The Secretary vs S.Nithya on 26 April, 2022
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 26.04.2022
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
The Secretary,
Tamil Nadu Olympics Association,
No.78, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium,
Sydenhams Road, Periamet,
Chennai – 600 003. .... Appellant
Versus
1.S.Nithya
2.The Secretary to the Union of India,
The Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports,
Room No.401, C-Wing, Shastri Bhawan,
New Delhi – 110 001.
3.Sports Authority of India,
Represented by its Authorised Signatory,
Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium Complex (East Gate),
Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003.
4.Athletic Federation of India,
Represented by its Authorised Signatory,
A-90, Naraina Industrial Area,
Phase-I, New Delhi – 110 028.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/27
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
5.The Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu,
Youth Welfare and Sports Development Department,
The Secretariat, Fort St.George,
Chennai – 600 009.
6.Sports Development Authority of Tamil Nadu,
Represented by its Authorised Signatory,
No.116A, Periyar E.V.R.High Road,
Nehru Park, Chennai – 600 084.
7.Tamil Nadu Athletics Association,
Represented by its Authorised Signatory,
No.81, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium,
Periamet, Chennai – 600 003.
8.Mrs.C.Latha,
Honorary Secretary,
Tamil Nadu Athletics Association,
No.81, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium,
Periamet, Chennai – 600 003.
9.The Secretary,
Indian Olympic Association,
Olympics Bhawan,
B-29, Qutub Industrial Area,
New Delhi – 110 016. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent,
to set aside the order dated 19.01.2022 passed in W.P.(MD).No.3447 of
2019 by this Court.
For Appellant : Mr.Arvind Pandian, Senior Counsel,
for Mr.R.Ganesh Kanna
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2/27
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
JUDGMENT
D.Bharatha Chakravarthy. J., :
A. The Writ Petition :
The Writ Petitioner is an athlete, who has participated and won
several medals at the State Level, South India Level in the event of Discus
Throw and having personally experienced discrimination and
maladministration of the Sport in Tamil Nadu approached this Court for the
following reliefs:-
“(i) to commence online registration system with
immediate effect for all the District Level, State Level
and National Level Athletics Championships,
Competitions, Meets and Events, similar to the model
followed in Federation Cup Athletics Championships
and to publish online the amounts allotted and spent
on each athlete for such events;
(ii) Directing the strict implementation of the
National Sports Development Code, 2011 in the State
of Tamil Nadu with immediate effect;
(iii) Directing the divesting of the sixth respondent in
the present form of its powers and its affiliation with
the third respondent and directing the reformation of
the sixth respondent by restructuring it with eminent
sports persons;
(iv) Directing an enquiry/investigation into the
management of funds, affairs and functioning of the
sixth respondent under the seventh respondent;
(v) Directing the constitution of a Special Committee
with eminent sports persons, to affiliate with the third
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
respondent and to regularise the conduct of athletics
Championships, competitions, meets and events in
Tamil Nadu and to function till the restructuring of
the sixth respondent with eminent sports persons;
(vi) Directing the respondents 1 to 4 to make
appropriate safety arrangements and provide proper
places of accommodation to women athletes for all
State Level and National Level Athletics
Championships, Competitions, Meets and Events.
2.The Secretary to the Union of India, The Ministry of Youth
Affairs and Sports, New Delhi; The Sports Authority of India; Athletic
Federation of India; The Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu, Youth
Welfare and Sports Development Department; Sports Development
Authority of Tamil Nadu; Tamil Nadu Athletics Association; one C.Latha,
Honorary Secretary of Tamil Nadu Athletics Association; The Secretary,
Indian Olympic Association, are arrayed as the respondents.
3.The grievance of the petitioner is that, in spite of her
performance and entitlement, she was denied entry to participate in the
Open National Championships for the years 2017 and 2018, even though
athletes who secure gold and silver medals will be automatically entitled to
participate in the Open National Championships. On the other hand, the
athletes who performed lesser were arbitrarily given a chance thereby
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
discriminating and overlooking the petitioner.
4.Further, it is the case of the petitioner that she hails from a lower
economic background. The respondents always adopt pick and choose
method to select athletes by ignoring and overlooking merit. In spite of the
allocation of huge amounts of money for development of sports by the
Central Government, the petitioner was not provided with any nourishment
and care, the petitioner was never given a proper accommodation, but
mostly the athletes were made to sign blank forms and signatures were
obtained as if the funds allocated have been duly spent for the sports
personnel and records will be created without even conducting training
camp and the signatures of the athletes are being obtained in blank papers.
The petitioner specifically given the case where it was recorded as if the
training camp was conducted between 11th September to 13th September
2018, for the 30th South Zone Junior Athletic Championships held at Guntur
between 15th September and 16th September 2018.The respondents are not
at all implementing the National Sports Development Code, 2011 and there
is absolutely no mechanism put in place to implement the Code.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
B.The Judgment:
5.In the above factual background and the various other
shortcomings referred to in detail in the affidavit filed along with the writ
petition and the facts presented during the hearing, learned Judge by the
judgment under appeal dated 19.01.2022, considered and analyzed the
issues in the administration of sports, the nature of powers exercised by the
persons in administration of sports, the conduct of the administrators, where
arbitrariness was writ large, accountability was less, consideration of
financial stakes getting precedence, and found that the absence of the
eminent sports persons’ involvement in decision making as one of the
primary causes of injustice meted out in sports.
6.Learned Judge then analysed the legal framework by
considering the power to legislate. Sports being the State subject under
Entry 33 of List II of the Constitution of India and the total absence of any
legislation whatsoever to govern the field and thereafter analysed the nature
of sports bodies, being amenable to Writ jurisdiction as they are involved in
discharge of public function, thus coming within the definition of 'State' as
per Article 12 of the Constitution of India and considered the decision of the
Board of Control for Cricket in India v. Cricket Association of Bihar &
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
Ors.1, and Zee Telefilms v. Union of India2, held that these bodies are
amenable to the power of judicial review under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India. Thereafter, learned Judge, in detail, analysed the
National Sports Development Code 2011, framed by the Government of
India and its various salient features.
7.The Judgment then considers the involvement of sports persons
in decision making and the absence of criteria for being the President of
National Sports Federations (NSFs)/Sports Associations. Similarly, the
provisions in the Code for selection of coaches and athletes is considered
and repeated cases cropping up before the various High Courts as well as
the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India were taken into account. Thereafter, the
importance of sports persons heading National Sports Federations (NSFs)
and Sports Associations/Affiliates was considered in paragraph Nos.36 and
37 of the Judgment. Thereafter, learned Judge considered the ways and
means to ensure transparency and accountability and took note that there is
no legislation in the State of Tamil Nadu such as, 'the Rajasthan Sports
(Registration, Recognition and Regulation of Associations) Act, 2005' and
'the Haryana Sports Council Act, 2006' and therefore held that there is
1. (2015) 3 SCC 251
2. (2005)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4 SCC 649
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
complete vacuum as far as the State of Tamil Nadu is concerned. In view of
the various suggestions made on behalf of the petitioners and on analysis of
the various provisions of the National Sports Development Code, 2011 and
considering the stand of the respondents, issued detailed directives in
paragraph No.44 of the judgment. Learned Judge has issued 14 directions in
the said paragraph No.44 and it is essential to reproduce the same:-
“44. In the light of the above discussions,
the following directives are issued:
i. The State government should consider for
creating a legal framework that imposes statutory
regulation on the functioning of every sports
organisation/clubs/association, including the state
unit of the National Sports Federation in respect of
every field of sports. The said legal framework should
include as far as possible all the following aspects
and directions and which shall continue to be in force
until the passing of such a statute by the state
legislature.
ii. Every Sports Association/organisation
shall be compulsorily registered with the State
Government and it shall be mandatory for the said
organisation to provide its complete details including
its constitution and details of its members, the sports
persons registered with the said association, its
financial status as well as the contributions/funds
received by the said association, the number and
details of events conducted by the Association and the
credentials of the sports persons participating in
every such event.
iii. Every Sports Association should have a
record of all the above stated details and it shall be
within the power of the State Government to inspect
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
such records at any given point of time.
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
iv. The State Government as well as the
state unit of the National Sports Federation of every
sport which is recognised by the Central Government
shall have a grievance cell, in order that deserving
sports persons may contact them directly in cases
where the recognised sports Association/affiliate does
not forward a deserving athlete/sports person’s name
for participation at the national level to the concerned
National Sports Federation.
v. The positions of President, Vice President
and Secretary of every sports Association/
organisation as well as important functionaries of
such organisations including that of the state unit of
the National sports Federation shall be held only by
sports persons and it must be ensured that a minimum
of 75% of the members of any sports
body/organisation/association/NSF shall be composed
of eminent sports persons and they shall have voting
rights.
vi. The selection of athletes shall be within
the purview of the decision-making powers of the
selection committee consisting only of sports persons
in the respective association as well as the sports
Federation.
vii. No person shall be entitled to hold the
position of President, Vice President, Secretary or any
other important functionary in any association as well
as Federation on the only ground that he or she has
contributed financially to the said organisation. The
holding of such a position shall be strictly governed
by the Constitution of the respective organisation
which shall clearly set out the procedure for election
to the office of President, Vice-President and
Secretary and other important functionaries, in
accordance with the previous direction in clause vi.
above that such positions can only be held by sports
persons.
viii. Any reference to the term ‘sports
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis persons’ for the purpose of holding the positions of
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
any of the important functionaries in any
organisation/association or Federation, would mean
a person who has participated in sports at least at the
State level, with participation at the national level and
winning of awards and accolades at the national level
being a desirable qualification.
ix. An online registration system for all
district level, state level and national level athletic
championships, competitions, meets and events,
similar to the model followed in the Federation Cup
Athletics Championships, shall be effectuated
immediately, which shall publish online the amount
allotted and spent on each athlete for such events.
x. It shall be mandatory for every
association to have a website where all its financial
aid as sanctioned and granted by the sports
development authority of the respective State as well
as by the Union Government must be furnished and
the details of all the applicants with their respective
credentials must also be mentioned in a transparent
manner in the website.
xi. In cases where it is found after an
enquiry that any association/organisation or state unit
of the National sports Federation has acted against
merit in respect of the selection of participants, the
State Government can take penal action against such
an organisation including blacklisting of such an
organisation for a minimum period of two years
during which the association/organisation will not be
in a position to sponsor candidates for national events
or receive grant from the State Government.
xii. In the event of any grievance made by
any athlete/sports person to the state unit of the
National sports Federation, the same shall be
disposed of within a period of one week from the date
on which such a grievance has been raised or before
the upcoming event in respect of which the grievance
is made, whichever is earlier, in order that the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis concerned athlete/sports person does not lose their
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
chance for the concerned year.
xiii. In the event of any grievance made with
respect to any state unit of the National sports
Federation, the state government shall dispose of the
same within a period of one week from the date on
which such a grievance has been raised or before the
upcoming event in respect of which the grievance is
made, whichever is earlier.
xiv. The suggestions placed by the sixth respondent,
which are extracted in para 9(vi) of this order shall be
considered by the respondents 1, 4 and 5. Such
compliance report be filed within a period of three
months.”
C.The Appeal & The Submissions:
8.The Secretary of the Tamil Nadu Olympic Association, which
was the ninth respondent in the Writ Petition has come up with the present
Writ Appeal, aggrieved by the order of the Learned Single Judge.
9.Mr.Arvind Pandian, Learned Senior Counsel appearing on
behalf of the appellant would assail the Judgment of the learned Single
Judge, essentially on the three grounds. He would submit that the directions
given in the Writ Petition are beyond the scope of the Writ Petition.
Secondly, it is his submission that the directions being legislative in nature,
Court ought not to have indulged in the same. Thirdly, he would submit that
as per the bye-laws of the associations, it was considered expedient to have
25% of the office-bearers as sports persons, while the learned Judge has
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
now directed that it should be 75%, which would run contrary to the bye-
laws of these Associations/Federations and Bodies.
D. The Discussion :
10.We have considered the submissions of the learned Senior
Counsel and perused the records of the case. We could not agree with the
submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel and therefore, we hereby
dismiss this Writ Appeal at the admission stage itself and confirm the entire
Judgment and the directions issued by the learned Single Judge for the
reasons as hereunder.
11.As far as the contention that the learned Judge has travelled
beyond the scope of the Writ Petition is concerned, First, we have extracted
the relief prayed for in the above Writ Petition and perusal of the affidavit
filed in support of the above Writ Petition, would demonstrate that the
petitioner has raised, grievances about the affairs of the sports
administration in the Tamil Nadu, on account of the office bearers / sports
administrators not being athletes / sports-persons, maladministering the
respective Federation/ Association, ex-facie indulgence in fraud and
corruption in team selection, absolutely not providing facilities which the
athletes ought to be provided, total of lack of empathy to the sports persons
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
and the harassment meted out to them and the huge amounts of funds
allocated by the Central and State Governments going down the drain
without any benefit to the sports person thereby directly resulting in the
poor outcome and quality of the sports. Therefore, we hold that it is
factually incorrect on the part of the learned Senior Counsel to contend that
the learned Judge has travelled beyond the scope of the Writ Petition.
12. Further, the High Courts while exercising the Jurisdiction
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in appropriate cases not only
have the powers to issue suitable directions which may not be exactly
prayed in the Writ Petition but also have a duty to issue such directions,
whenever the facts and circumstances of the case demand. Considering the
alarming state of affairs and urgent need to remedy the situation especially
in the absence of an appropriate legislation, the learned Judge had issued the
directions. In this regard, the Supreme Court of India in Comptroller and
Auditor General Vs. K.S. Jaganathan3, in paragraph No.18 held as
follows:-
“Article 226 is designedly couched in wide
language in order not to confine the power conferred by
it on the High Courts only to the power to issue
3. (1986
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis (2) SCC 679)
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
prerogative writs as understood England. The High
Courts exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 can
issue directions, orders or writs so as to enable the
High Courts to reach injustice wherever it is found and
to mould the reliefs to meet the particular and
complicated needs of this country.”
13.The Supreme Court of India, Krishan Lal Gera Vs. State of
Haryana4, had categorically held that it is the duty of the High Court to
strike at such actions of nepotism, favouritism, especially in the field of
sports, in paragraph No.21 of the said Judgment is extracted hereunder:-
“21. Whenever nepotism, favouritism and
unwarranted government largesse to private interests,
threaten to frustrate schemes for public benefit, it is the
duty of the High Courts to strike at such action. The
stadium is meant for improving and developing sports
and sportspersons.”
14. The nature of powers of this Court under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, has been laid down in the Judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India, in long back in Dwarka Nath vs. Income Tax
Officer, Special Circle D-ward, Kanpur and Ors.5, wherein it held as
follows:-
4. (2011) 10 SCC 529 : 2011 SCC OnLine SC 856 at page 536
5. (AIR 1966 SC 81)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
“6.This article is couched in comprehensive
phraseology and it ex facie confers a wide power on the
high court to reach injustice wherever it is found. The
constitution designedly used a wide language in
describing the nature of the power, the purposes for
which and the person or authority against whom it can
be exercised. It can issue writs in the nature of
prerogative writs as understood in England; but the
scope of those writs also is widened by the use of the
expression "nature", for the said expression does not
equate the writs that can be issued in India with the
those in England, but only draws in analogy from them.
That apart, High Courts can also issue directions,
orders or writs other than the prerogative writs. It
enables the High Courts to mould the reliefs to meet
the peculiar and complicated requirements of this
country. Any attempt to equate the scope of the power of
the High Court under article 226 of the Constitution with
that of the English courts to issue prerogative writs is to
introduce the unnecessary procedural restrictions grown
over the years in a comparatively small country like
England with a unitary from of Government to a vast
country like India functioning under a federal structure.
Such a construction defeats the purpose of the article
itself. To say this is not to say that the High Courts can
function arbitrarily under this Article. Some limitations
are implicit in the article and others may be evolved to
direct the article through defined channels. This
interpretation has been accepted by this Court in T. C.
Basappa v. Nagappa, MANU/SC/0098/1954:
[1955]1SCR250 and Irani v. State of Madras,
MANU/SC/0080/1961 : [1962]2SCR169.”
15.Further, in the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of
India in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Hindustan Sugar Mills Ltd.6, it
6. (1988)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3 SCC 449 at page 454
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
held as under:-
“4. ………The High Court was exercising high
prerogative jurisdiction under Article 226 and could
have moulded the relief in a just and fair manner as
required by the demands of the situation...”
16.The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, had in its Judgment in
State of Kerala Vs. T.P.Roshana7, categorically upheld that the High
Court's necessity to innovate, widen the base and organize the relief, so that
the Court can actualize the social justice even as it inhibits the injustice and
laid down that the remedial jurisprudence, transforms the Court powers into
affirmative structuring of redress, so as to make it personally meaningful
and socially relevant. It is useful to extract the relevant paragraph Nos.3 &
40 of the said Judgment, which reads as follows:-
“3. Any incisive study of the exercise of the
writ power in India may reveal that it limits its action to
quashing or nullifying orders proceeding on a violation
of law, but stops short of a reconstruction whereby a
valid scheme may replace a void project. This is no
reflection on the High Court's ruling but is
symptomatic of an obsolescent aspect of the judicial
process, its remedial shortcomings in practice and the
need to innovate the means, to widen the base and to
organise the reliefs so that the court actualises social
justice even as it inhibits injustice. This community
perspective of the justice system explains why we have
resorted to certain unusual directions and have shaped
the ultimate complex of orders in these proceedings in a
7. (1979)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1 SCC 572
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
self-acting package. With this exordium we proceed to
narrate briefly the necessary facts and developments
revelatory of the course of events and the cause of
action, the impact of the High Court's judgment and the
compulsions which have brought the State in appeal to
this Court.
40. Had we left the judgment of the High Court
in the conventional form of merely quashing the formula
of admission the remedy would have aggravated the
malady — confusion, agitation, paralysis. The root of the
grievance and the fruit of the writ are not individual but
collective and while the “adversary system.” makes the
Judge a mere umpire, traditionally speaking, the
community orientation of the judicial function, so
desirable in the Third World remedial jurisprudence,
transforms the court's power into affirmative
structuring of redress so as to make it personally
meaningful and socially relevant. Frustration of
invalidity is part of the judicial duty; fulfilment of
legality is complementary. This principle of affirmative
action is within our jurisdiction under Article 136 and
Article 32 and we think the present cases deserve its
exercise.”
17.Therefore, when the extraordinary situation compels, that too
in the Writ Petition filed with core and crux of the issue being sports
administration and management, issuing of directions as extracted above
cannot be termed as traveling beyond the scope of the Writ Petition, but,
very much within the scope of the Writ Petition. As a matter of fact, it is in
the realm of the duty of the High Court in exercise of its powers under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to properly grant the reliefs in a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
manner as to redress the grievance actually expressed in the Writ petition,
and thus, we reject the submission made by the learned Senior Counsel.
18.The second contention of the learned Senior Counsel is that the
directions amounted to judicial legislation and therefore, this Court should
interfere. In this regard, the learned Judge, has categorically taken into
account the power of the State to legislate and in the absence of any
legislation in this regard. It has been held time and again by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India, that while Courts will not normally, foray into the
domain of the legislature, issuing of guidelines and directions for due
observance until a legislation is enacted, has been repeatedly stressed upon.
As a matter of fact, Dayaram -Vs- Sudhir Batham and Others8 the
question arose, whether the general directions issued in Kumari Maduri
Patil Vs. Additional Commissoner’s case9 being legislative in nature are
impermissible? The issue was considered in detail by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court of India, it is useful to reproduce paragraph No.10 of the Judgment :-
"10. This Court has a constitutional duty to
protect the fundamental rights of Indian citizens.
Whenever this Court found that the socio-economic
rights of citizens required to be enforced, but there was
a vacuum on account of the absence of any law to
8 (2012) 1 SCC 333
9 (1994)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6 SCC 241
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
protect and enforce such rights, this Court has
invariably stepped in and evolved new mechanisms to
protect and enforce such rights, to do complete justice.
This has been done by re-fashioning remedies beyond
those traditionally available under writ jurisdiction by
issuing appropriate directions or guidelines to protect
the fundamental rights and make them meaningful."
Thereafter, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, considered the Judgments in S.P.
Gupta -Vs- Union of India10, Bandu Mukthi Morcha -Vs- Union Of
India11 , Vishaka -Vs- State of Rajasthan12, Vineet Narain -Vs- Union of
India13, Kalyan Chandra Sarkar -Vs- Rajesh Ranjan14, Supreme Court
Bar Association -Vs- Union of India15, and also considered the Judgments
in which it was held that the courts ought not to have issued directions, and
expounded that :-
"The principle is wherever the interests of weaker
sections are adversely affected due to unscrupulous
acts of persons attempting to usurp the benefits meant
for such weaker sections, court can, and in fact
should, step in, till a proper legislation is in place."
And held that the directions issued in Maduri Patil’s case to fill up the
vacuum when there is no legislation as laudable and valid.
10 (1981) Supp SCC 87
11 (1984) 3 SCC 161
12 (1997) 6 SCC 241
13 (1998) 1 SCC 226
14 (2005) 3 SCC 384
15 (1998) 4 SCC 409
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
19.The said principles are squarely applicable to the instant case
and we hold that in the facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be said
that the directives are overreaching and in the domain of legislature, when
there is absolute vacuum and we reject the contention of the appellant in this
regard.
20.The next submission on behalf of the appellant is that while
only 25% of the office bearers are to be sports persons under the relevant
bye-laws, the Direction No.(v), issued by the learned Judge that 75% of the
members of any sports body should be composed by with the eminent sports
persons, with voting rights is incorrect. In this regard, the Supreme Court in
the case of Krishan Lal Gera v. State of Haryana16, held that the Sports
bodies cannot be hijacked by persons totally unconnected to sports. The
relevant portion is extracted hereunder:-
"19……….. Basic sports infrastructure
should be made available at village, taluka and
district levels and there should be a comprehensive
plan for optimum utilization of the facilities already
available so that they are accessible to sportspersons.
The government cannot allow sports facilities and
sports bodies to be hijacked by persons totally
unconnected with sports for private gain or for the
benefit of an exclusive few. State of Haryana prides
itself in giving importance to sports. We do hope that
the state administration realizes the needs of the
16 (2011)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 10 SCC 529 : 2011 SCC OnLine SC 856 at page 536
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
society and the need for improving sports as an
integral part of human resources development.
Participation in sports and sport competitions builds
patriotism and national pride, apart from other
regular benefits."
21.Further in the matter of Board of Control for Cricket in India
v. Cricket Association of Bihar & Ors17, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of
India appointed Justice Lodha Committee, which in its report recommended
as follows :
"19. ADMINISTRATION OF THE BCCI
(1)………
(2) The day-to-day management of the BCCI shall be
conducted by professionals in both cricketing and
non-cricketing matters.
....."
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in paragraph No.25 appointed the Cricket
Advisory Committee consisting only of reputed former International
Cricketers.
22.The XIII Olympic Congress, in consonance with Basic
Universal Principles of Good Governance of the Olympics and Sports
Movement, resolved that the Athletes should be involved in decision making
with full voting rights. The Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports,
17 (2015)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3 SCC 251
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
Government of India, vide its communication dated 17.05.2010, to the
Olympic Association and all recognized National Sports Federation with
insisted on compliance to the said guidelines. The said communication is
Annexure XIV of the National Sports Code, 2011, which was also fully
extracted in the Judgment under appeal and we reproduce paragraph No.7 of
the same, which is as hereunder :-
“7. The Resolution passed by the XIII Olympic
Congress, also underlines the essentiality of athletes'
involvement in decision making, with full voting rights;
and establishment of grievance redressal mechanism for
athletes. As you are aware, these requirements form an
integral part of the Government guidelines (initially
notified in 1975, and modified in 1997 and 2001). But
unfortunately, the majority of NSF's including IOA are
yet to fully implement these basic principles of good
governance.”
23.It is time and again decried with regard to the Sports in India
that there is abundant sporting talent among 125 Crore population,
especially, the Athletes from rural India, if encouraged will be no less than
in any of their counterparts around the world. Even though financial
constraints have been felt, it is also noticed that the countries which have
more severe financial constraints, are actually performing better than India.
Thus, a closure scrutiny of the situation reveals that it is the proper
implementation of the appropriate policies such as National Sports
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
Development Code and not having transparency and best practices in the
matter of administration of sports, corruption and nepotism and fraud in
selection etc, which are the primary reasons hampering sports and
sportspersons.
24.It is the lack sporting culture primarily among the
administrators which is the major concern. It is not possible unless the
people who are in sports administration know how it feels to be a sport
person, what it takes to cope up with any loss, the physiological needs and
impact of its changes, the frame of mind etc. It requires empathic
understanding of the Athletes / Sports persons and the requirements of the
particular sports as such. Thus, sports specially requires more of
heuristic/empirical knowledge than any other field. That is why persons
other than Athlete/sports persons, are unconsciously incompetent to
administer sports. In other words, they not only don't know, but they also
don't know, what they don't know. That is why, the International Olympic
Congress, the law makers, the Judicial precedents, the Ministry of Youth
and Sports Affairs, the National Sports Development Code, all advocate
unanimously that Athletes / Sport persons should have a definite say, in the
matter of administration of sports, which cannot be a reality, unless and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
otherwise a minimum of 75% of them are their office bearers in these
Federations / Associations.
25.Outsiders including Businessmen, Politicians, Owners of the
Academic institutions are welcome to encourage, fund and sponsor sports
and sportspersons, but insisting that they will be the part of the
administration, will only lead to ruin. So long these associations were
predominantly administrated only by the non-sports persons and that is why
the poor run so far. There is need for imminent change which can brook no
delay and therefore, the learned Judge rightly issued the directions. The
stark inequalities in providing five star facilities to these administrators
while showing apathy to the ordinary Athletes need to be stopped. Not to
say about other serious mal-practices, sexual harassment, etc. Therefore, we
hold the decisive involvement of sports persons/Athletics in the matter of
administration of sports is essential and indispensable.
26.Merely because, it is mentioned in the Bye-laws of the
Association that 25% of the office bearers can be sports persons, will not in
any manner come in the way of issue of appropriate directions by this Court
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. As a matter of fact, it is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
expected of the Appellant Association to implement each and every
direction in true spirit, to bring the respite to the thousands of sports persons
and aspiring athletes within the State of Tamil Nadu, so that some day in the
near future, we can witness more and more Indian Athletes / Sports Persons
adorning the Olympic Podium, proportionate to the capability of this great
nation.
E. The Result :
27.For all the above reasons, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed.
However, there shall be no order as to costs.
(M.N.B., C.J.) (D.B.C.J.,)
26.04.2022
Index : Yes
Speaking order
pkn/klt
To
1.The Secretary to the Union of India,
The Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports,
Room No.401, C-Wing, Shastri Bhawan,
New Delhi – 110 001.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
2.The Authorised Signatory,
Sports Authority of India,
Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium Complex (East Gate),
Lodhi Road, New Delhi – 110 003.
3.The Authorised Signatory,
Athletic Federation of India,
A-90, Naraina Industrial Area,
Phase-I, New Delhi – 110 028.
4.The Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu,
Youth Welfare and Sports Development Department,
The Secretariat, Fort St.George,
Chennai – 600 009.
5.The Authorised Signatory,
Sports Development Authority of Tamil Nadu,
No.116A, Periyar E.V.R.High Road,
Nehru Park, Chennai – 600 084.
6.The Authorised Signatory,
Tamil Nadu Athletics Association,
No.81, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium,
Periamet, Chennai – 600 003.
7.Mrs.C.Latha,
Honorary Secretary,
Tamil Nadu Athletics Association,
No.81, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium,
Periamet, Chennai – 600 003.
8.The Secretary,
Indian Olympic Association,
Olympics Bhawan,
B-29, Qutub Industrial Area,
New Delhi – 110 016.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
klt
W.A.No.1202 of 2022
26.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
