Rajasthan High Court
Ishita Negi D/O Shri Heera Singh vs Badminton Association Of India ... on 9 February, 2023
Bench: Inderjeet Singh
[2023/RJJP/002234]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2756/2023
Ishita Negi D/o Shri Heera Singh, Resident of B-141/1, Ground
Floor, West Vinod Nagar, New Delhi
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Badminton Association Of India, Through Its Secretary, D-
6/10, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi- 110057.
2. Rajasthan Badminton Association, Through Its Secretary,
Lcd196A, Bapu Nagar, Jaipur-302105.
3. Reyansh Verma S/o Shri Anand Mohan, aged about 14
years, Minor through his Natural Guardian Shri Anand
Mohan, Aged about 45 years, R/o 1060, Sector 7, Urban
Estate, Karnal.
4. Pranit Somani S/o Shri Rupesh Somani, aged 14 years,
Minor through his Natural Guardian Shri Rupesh Somani,
aged 44 years, R/o C-503, RNA Royale Park, MG Road,
Kandiwali, Mumbai.
5. Archit Vyas S/o Shri Ravindra Vyas, aged 12 years, Minor
Through his Natural Guardian Shri Ravindra Vyas, R/o 36,
Bhosale Nagar, Hadapsar, Pune.
6. Tanay Mehendale S/o Shri Ajay Mehendale, aged 14
years, Minor Through his Natural Guardian Shri Ajay
Mehendale, aged 43 years, R/o M Avenue, M-9, 103,
Global City, Virar (W), Mumbai.
7. Vishwajeet Chaudhary S/o Shri Vineet Chaudhary, aged
15 years, Minor Through his Natural Guardian Shri Vineet
Chaudhary, aged 44 years, R/o C-9/9035, Vasant Kunj,
New Delhi.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Siddharth Bapna
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajendra Prasad, Sr. Adv., assisted
by Mr. Archit Bohra
Ms. Aastha Singhal
Mr. Shubham Soni
[2023/RJJP/002234] (2 of 3) [CW-2756/2023]
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH
Order
09/02/2023
Heard on the application for impleading applicants as party
respondents No.3 to 7 in the writ petition.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is
allowed. The applicants are impleaded as party respondents No.3
to 7 in the writ petition. Amended cause title is taken on record.
Counsel for the petitioner prayed for interim relief as the
tournament in question is going to held today and in this matter
age of the petitioner is under dispute.
Mr. Rajendra Prasad, learned Senior Counsel appearing on
behalf of the respondents submits that it is a case of fraud on the
part of the father of the petitioner. Counsel further submits that
the father of the petitioner has obtained two birth certificates from
New Delhi Municipal Corporation, in which, one of the birth
certificate issued on 05.09.2009 and the date of birth has shown
as 03.07.2009, whereas in another birth certificate issued on
14.01.2023, wherein the date of birth has shown as 03.07.2008
and there is dispute with regard to date of birth of the petitioner.
Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Shubhas Jain
Vs. Rajeshwari Shivam & Ors. in Civil Appeal No. 2848 of
2021 has held as under;
"26. It is well settled that the High Court
exercising its extraordinary writ jurisdiction
under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, does not adjudicate hotly disputed
questions of facts. It is not for the High
Court to make a comparative assessment
of conflicting technical reports and decide
which one is acceptable."
[2023/RJJP/002234] (3 of 3) [CW-2756/2023]
In my considered view, the highly disputed question of facts
are involved in this matter, therefore, in view of the judgment
passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Subhash
Jain (supra) no case is made out for interference by this Court
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
In that view of the matter, the present writ petition stands
dismissed. All the pending applications also stand disposed of.
(INDERJEET SINGH),J
Upendra Pratap Singh /154
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
