The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of following the directions of the court and the authority, as well as the right to challenge decisions through appropriate legal proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.

Heard Sri P.L. Narasimha Rao represented by Sri Akula Sri Krishna Sai Bhargav, learned counsel for the appellants, Sri Ghanta Sridhar, learned counsel for respondent No.1, the learned Government Pleader for Sports appearing for respondent No.2, the learned Standing Counsel for SAAP, appearing for respondent No.3, Sri R. Sameer Ahmed learned counsel for respondent No.4, Sri K. Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for respondent No.5 in W.A.No.439 of 2023 and Sri P.L. Narasimha Rao, rep. by Sri Akula Sri Krishna Sai Bhargav, learned counsel for the appellant, Government Pleader for Stamps & Registration, appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri G.R. Sudhakar, represented by a learned Senior Counsel Sri K.S. Murthy, appearing for respondents 3 & 4 in W.P.No.468 of 2023.

2. As these Writ Appeals arise out of a common order passed in W.P.No.924 of 2021 and W.P.No.20084 of 2020 dated 01.03.2023, they are being disposed of by way of this common order.

3. There has been some litigation preceding the present round of litigation and the same requires to be noticed.

4. A Society known as the “Andhra Kabaddi Association” was registered in Ananthapuram District, with the District Registrar, Ananthapuram with registration No.115/2010. This association is said to have had periodic elections and changes in management on various dates including 09.09.2015, 07.05.2018 and 07.09.2019 and these changes were duly recorded by the 2nd respondent-District Registrar, Ananthapuram from time to time. A rival organization also named as Andhra Kabaddi Association was registered with the District Registrar, Krishna District with registration No.436/2018, by the 4th respondent, in W.A.No.468 of 2023, along with others. It is alleged on both sides that there was a tussle for the management of the Andhra Kabaddi Association with Registration No.115 /2020 as this association was affiliated to the Amateur Kabaddi Federation of India (AKFI), New Delhi which is the body regulating the sport of Kabaddi in India. The disputes centered around the persons who could represent the State level Kabaddi Association in the elections which were being held for electing Office Bearers and for considering amendment to the Memorandum of Association of the Amateur Kabaddi Federation of India. In that view of the matter, there were various litigations including W.P.No.10431 of 2019, W.P.No.16899 of 2019 and W.P.No.46681 of 2018 which came to be disposed of by this Court.

5. The sum and substance of these litigations, as observed earlier, was on the question of who would represent the sport of Kabaddi in the State, at the National level. Initially, the 4th respondent who along with certain others, sought to be recognized as the persons who could represent the Andhra Kabaddi Association with Registration No.115 of 2010, was unsuccessful before the Amateur Kabaddi Federation of India. However, in the course of these disputes, Amateur Kabaddi Federation of India is said to have directed the office bearers of the Andhra Kabaddi Association (Registration No.115 of 2010) to conduct proper elections for the association, in line with the directions of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in W.P.(C).4601 of 2013 dated 03.08.2018. These directions were passed on 17.01.2019.

6. It appears that the group represented by the 4th respondent, in W.P.No.924 of 2021, had moved W.P.No.46681 of 2018 before this Court, for a direction for conduct of elections in the Andhra Kabaddi Association (Registration No.115 of 2010) and consequent to the directions of this Court, such elections were held on 23.03.2019 under the supervision of a former Judge of this Court and one Sri G. Venkata Reddy had been elected as President and the 4th respondent, in W.P.No.924 of 2021, was elected as the Secretary of the Association. The list of elected Office Bearers was then sent to the 2nd respondent-Registrar and the same were entered into the relevant records. Thereafter, the persons, who are said to h