Aadhar OTP Demand for Cricket Player Registration Held Arbitrary: Court Prioritizes TW3 Test for Age Verification - 2025-04-15

Court Rules Against Cricket Association's Mandatory Aadhar OTP Demand for Player Registration

Hyderabad, India - In a significant judgment delivered on April 3rd, 2025, Justice NageshBheemapaka of the High Court decisively ruled against the Hyderabad Cricket Association (HCA), reprimanding them for demanding Aadhar OTP verification from a young cricketer for registration. The court upheld the primacy of the TW3 (Tanner-Whitehouse 3) test for age verification in Under-16 cricket tournaments and directed the HCA to register the petitioner based on his TW3 test results.

Background of the Case

The case arose from a writ petition filed by a 15-year-old cricketer aggrieved by the actions of Respondents 2 to 4, identified as the Hyderabad Cricket Association (HCA) and its officials. The petitioner alleged that HCA representatives demanded his Aadhar OTP, threatening to hinder his cricketing career if he refused. Despite possessing valid documents like a passport, birth certificate, and school records, and having cleared the TW3 bone test for age verification, the HCA insisted on Aadhar OTP.

The petitioner's father reported receiving calls demanding the OTP and alleged unauthorized attempts to access his son's Aadhar details. An FIR was lodged citing violations under the Aadhar Act and Information Technology Act. Despite interim orders from the court, the petitioner claimed the HCA did not implement them, further obstructing his participation in tournaments.

Arguments Presented

Petitioner's Counsel argued that demanding Aadhar OTP was arbitrary and unjust, violating the Supreme Court's directives on Aadhar 's limited role in identity proof and the right to privacy as established in Justice K. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India . They emphasized that BCCI guidelines prioritize the TW3 test for age determination for U-16 players, and Aadhar is only meant for address proof. The insistence on OTP, ignoring other valid documents and the TW3 test, was deemed vindictive.

Respondents (HCA) countered that BCCI guidelines mandate Aadhar Update History for online registration when Aadhar is used as address proof. They claimed the OTP was sought to help generate this history, not for age verification, and denied any coercion. HCA also raised concerns about discrepancies in birth certificates received from an anonymous source, leading to an investigation and holding the petitioner's registration. They argued for an alternative grievance redressal mechanism within the association and denied violating any data privacy laws.

Court's Observations and Reasoning

Justice Bheemapaka meticulously examined the BCCI guidelines and UIDAI circulars, particularly Circular No. 8 of 2023, which clarifies that Aadhar is not conclusive proof of date of birth. The court highlighted that for Under-16 players, the TW3 test is the determining factor for age eligibility, not Aadhar details.

The judgment pointedly noted:

> "Respondent No. 2 or its representatives cannot demand for sharing OTP generated in respect of Petitioner's Aadhar card under all or any circumstances and for whatever reason. More so, Circular No. 8 is very categorical to show that the demand made by Respondent No. 2 even for registration of player under the guise of facilitating players for registration of player with BCCI sharing of OTP is not mandatory."

The court further emphasized that the HCA's own pleadings contradicted their actions. While claiming Aadhar was for address proof, they also argued it was necessary for date of birth verification, a stance the court found inconsistent with BCCI guidelines.

Regarding the TW3 test, the court stated:

> "Even for remote understanding of circumstances from the perspective of Respondent No.2 facilitating registration of player with BCCI, Respondent No.2 shall rely and consider TW3 Test examination report for ascertaining the age of a player."

The court also drew adverse inference against the HCA for not producing the TW3 test report, suggesting it was deliberately withheld. It strongly criticized the HCA's conduct, including demanding OTP late at night and ignoring interim court orders, deeming it "not bona fide and is by design" and "nothing short of high handedness." The judgment also noted the failure of HCA to follow its own grievance redressal mechanisms and principles of natural justice by not issuing a show cause notice to the petitioner.

Final Verdict and Implications

The High Court allowed the Writ Petition, directing the Hyderabad Cricket Association to:

Register the petitioner with both BCCI and HCA.

Allow him to participate in all tournaments based on his TW3 test report.

Refrain from relying on Aadhar card history for age verification.

The court concluded that HCA's actions were in violation of rules, regulations, and principles of natural justice. This judgment sets a precedent against the arbitrary demand for Aadhar OTP in sports registrations and reinforces the importance of established age verification methods like the TW3 test in youth sports, while underscoring the need for sports bodies to adhere to fair procedures and respect privacy rights.