Back
Dismisses Muskan Rathi's Plea Against Exclusion from Asian Games Category
Court upholds expert judgment, refuses to interfere with selection policy for Kurash events
The has dismissed a petition filed by athlete Muskan Rathi, challenging the decision of to exclude the women's +87 kg category from selection trials for the 20th Asian Games. Justice Amit Mahajan ruled that courts cannot substitute their own views for those of sports authorities and subject experts when the decision is based on .
The Case: A Fight for a Fair Trial
Muskan Rathi, a Kurash practitioner, approached the High Court seeking a to compel TIKA and the to conduct fair, transparent, and performance-based selection trials for the women's +87 kg weight category. She argued that by conducting trials only for the -57 kg and -78 kg categories, the authorities acted arbitrarily, unreasonably, and in violation of .
The petition also challenged Clause 6 of a circular issued by the , which prescribed eligibility criteria that, according to Rathi, were inconsistent with the stated objective of maximizing India's medal prospects.
The Government's Defense: Medal-Winning Probability
In their counter affidavit, the respondents contended that India had historically secured medals in the -78 kg and -57 kg categories, while no international medal had been won in the +87 kg category in the preceding two years. The decision to exclude the +87 kg category, they argued, was taken after objectively evaluating the comparative medal-winning probability of all categories.
This assessment aligned with the government's policy goal of maximizing India's medal prospects at the Asian Games, a factor the court found critical.
Legal Analysis: The Limits of
Justice Mahajan underscored the narrow scope of judicial intervention in matters of sports selection. The court observed that the decision to exclude an athlete from a particular category was taken by authorities and subject experts based on an objective assessment.
"This Court exercising jurisdiction under cannot issue a to the authorities to take a different view. The decision to exclude athlete from participation in particular category is objectively taken by the authorities and subject experts which cannot be interfered."
The court rejected Rathi's contention that candidates selected in the -57 kg category had not participated despite their names being sent, noting that this did not advance her case, which sought inclusion in a different category.
Key Observations: Timing and Practicality
The court also noted a significant practical hurdle: the Asian Games had already commenced on
.
"No relief thus can be granted to the petitioner at this juncture,"
the judge stated, further reinforcing the dismissal.
The Final Verdict
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that no ground for exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 was made out. The ruling reaffirms the principle that courts will respect the expertise of sports bodies in making selection decisions, provided they are based on and not or .
The judgment serves as a reminder of the limited role of in sporting matters, particularly when decisions are taken with a clear policy rationale and by subject-matter experts.
