Judicial review in sports policy matters is limited to cases of evident arbitrariness; courts should defer to the expertise of selection committees unless clear injustice is demonstrated.

ORDER

M. Nagaprasanna, J.

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order dated 24-08-2015 issued by the 3rd respondent/Youth Services and Sports Department of the State Government in drawing up of guidelines for award/allocation of marks for participation under the National Championship on par with marks allotted for participation in Senior National Championship.

2. Heard Sri B. N. Suresh Babu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Navya Shekar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

3. Sans details, facts in brief are as follows:-

The petitioner claims to be a young roller skating player and further claims to have participated in junior and senior National, International and Asian Championships and has won gold, silver and bronze medals and accordingly appended plethora of documents to the petition to demonstrate his participation in such events. The 1st respondent/Department of Sports and Youth Services encourages development of games and sports in the State by giving recognition to those players who participate and win medals by conferring awards called Karnataka Ekalavya Award on those participants. The eligibility for enlistment in those awards and grant is dealt with in the guidelines issued by the State Government from time to time by way of orders. The guidelines depict allocation of marks for participation in junior level National Championship or senior level National Championship, as the case would be. The guidelines that held the field from 2010 are the guidelines of the year 2010 issued by the 1st respondent for conferring Ekalavya awards. The process depicted under the said order was the one that was carried forward for conferring such awards in the year 2010-2011. What comes about as new guidelines for the year 2015 is what has become the material for challenge before this Court in the subject petition in terms of the order dated 24-08-2015, the impugned order.

4. The learned counsel Sri Suresh Babu B. N., appearing for the petitioner would vehemently contend that allocation of marks for participation in the events is grossly arbitrary, as the participants who participate in senior level National Championship or the like are assigned higher marks than those who participate in junior level National Championship. The learned counsel would further submit that Ekalavya awards are conferred on the basis of points and the points are allotted differently for senior and junior levels. Therefore, the petitioner has not been enlisted for conferring Ekalavya award at any point in time. On this score, the learned counsel would submit that it is highly arbitrary and should be made equal to all participants in all Championships to be eligible for conferment of award on the basis of marks allotted.

5. Per-contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate would vehemently refute the submissions to contend that it is the policy of the State Government to divide senior and junior level National Championship participants and on that basis award marks. It is his submission that it is highly ununderstandable as to how such differentiation can even construed to be arbitrary. The participation is clearly indicated. The sports tournaments conducted at junior level are entirely different from National Championship at senior level. The sport that the petitioner plays is a non-Olympic game. It is a roller skating and since the petitioner is in a non- Olympic game, he is entitled to