IMPORTANT POINT
Disqualification under Article 27(f) of the GFA Statutes requires both being charged and having charges framed for a non-bailable offence.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Ryan Menezes appearing for the Petitioner, Mr. Parag Rao for Respondent No. 1, Mr. Mulgaonkar for Respondent No. 2, Ms. Shanbag for Respondent No. 3, Mr. Nitin Sardessai, learned Senior Counsel appearing with Mr. Vibhav Amonkar for Respondent No. 4 and the learned Additional Government Advocate Ms. Maria Correia for Respondent No. 5.

2. The Petitioner who contested the election conducted by Respondent No. 1 and lost to Respondent No. 4, is challenging the order passed by the Returning Officer dated 20.10.2022 together with the election of Respondent No. 4 in this Petition.

3. A few facts which are not disputed are as follows:

(A) Respondent No. 1 is the All India Football Federation whereas Respondent No. 2 is the Association operating in Goa.

(B) Respondent No. 2 is considered to be a State and amenable to writ jurisdiction as observed by this Court in the case of Salcete Football Club Vs. Union of India & Others, 2022 SCC OnLine Bom 1857.

(C) A notice dated 20.09.2022 was issued by Respondent No. 2 thereby notifying the election programme for election of its Executive Committee. Filing of nominations was to be held from 21.09.2022 to 30.09.2022. Thereafter, scrutiny of the nominations started on 30.09.2022, which was supposed to be concluded on or before 07.10.2022, when the list of received, accepted, and rejected nominations was to be published. The final date for withdrawal of nominations was on 14.10.2022, whereas the list of accepted nominations was to be declared on 17.10.2022. The election was supposed to be conducted on 30.10.2022.

4. The Petitioner’s contention is that in the election programme, there was no date fixed for filing of the objection, if any, against the nominations filed or to hear such objections, which could be decided by the Returning Officer/Respondent No.3. It is his contention that no provision was made in the election programme for filing of an objection and deciding on it. Vide letter dated 20.09.2020, Respondent No. 3 was appointed as a Returning Officer to conduct the elections.

5. It is the case of the Petitioner that he is a Member of Goa Velha Sports Club and an active Member of Respondent No. 2. The Petitioner was nominated for the election to the post of the President of Respondent No. 2 and accordingly, he filed a self- declaration form along with his nomination on 28.09.2022. The candidature of the Petitioner was proposed by Panjim Footballers and seconded by Saligao United, both Members of Respondent No. 2.

6. On 07.10.2022, the Returning Officer/Respondent No. 3 notified the list of nominations which were received, accepted and rejected. According to such a list, the candidature of the Petitioner for the post of President in the form of his nomination was accepted. Similarly, the nomination filed by Respondent No. 4 for the post of President was also accepted. The Petitioner was unable to obtain a copy of the nomination papers filed by Respondent No. 4 due to paucity of time. Finally, the list of accepted nominations was published on 17.10.2022.

7. It is the contention of the Petitioner that on 17.10.2022 itself, he learnt that Respondent No. 4 is facing charges of the offence, under Section 408 of IPC which is a non-bailable offence, wherein the chargesheet is filed before the learned Magistrate at Panaji Court. The Petitioner also got knowledge that Respondent No. 4 appeared before the Magistrate and filed an Application for compounding of the said offence, which was granted and the case was disposed of as compounded.

8. The Petitioner would then submit that the pendency of a criminal case and more particularly, the filing of a chargesheet involving a non-bailable offence itself, disqualifies Respondent No. 4 from contesting the election, particularly when he suppressed such information in the nomination form. It is the contention of the Petitioner that Respondent No. 4 gave a false declaration by suppressing the fact that he was chargesheeted for a non-bailable offen