The rejection of nominations must be based on substantial reasons, and the interpretation of the Rules and Regulations must align with the applicable laws and principles of natural justice.

JUDGMENT

1. The petitioners in the instant writ petition seek to challenge the validity of the impugned order dated 14.12.2021 passed by the Appellate Authority (hereinafter `AA') of the All India Chess Federation New Delhi (hereinafter `AICF') affirming the decision passed by the Ethics Commission (hereinafter `EC') dated 14.12.2021, whereby the decision passed by the Presiding Officer (hereinafter `PO') dated 10.08.2021 rejecting the candidature of respondent nos.1 to 4, was set aside.

2. The facts of the instant case would indicate that the Goa Chess Association (hereinafter `GCA') which is registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 is a State level sports federation which is affiliated to AICF as well as to the Sports Authority of Goa (hereinafter `SAG').

3. The GCA is governed by its Memorandum of Association (hereinafter `MoA') and the Rules and Regulations approved by the general body of the GCA.

4. On 08.01.2017, a special general body was conducted, whereby, an increase in the posts of the Executive Committee was approved from seven to twelve. Accordingly, on 08.01.2017 itself, the constitution of the GCA was amended, increasing the posts of the Executive Committee from seven to twelve.

5. On 22.07.2021, the elections of the Executive Committee were notified as per the rules applicable to the said election. The list of approved nomination forms was published on 05.08.2021 and the time for withdrawal of the nomination form was from 05.08.2021 to 10.08.2021 and the final list of the candidates was declared on 10.08.2021.

6. On 10.08.2021, the PO declared the final list of the candidates wherein, he found that the respondents were contesting the election from the talukas, from where the office bearers were already declared as elected unopposed. The PO, therefore, recorded that as per the information provided to him, there were 12 talukas affiliated to the GCA and as per the resolution passed and the amendments incorporated by the special general body meeting dated 08.01.2017, each taluka was already represented through an unopposed elected candidate, therefore, the candidature from 4 talukas namely, Barder, Tiswadi, Ponda and Salcete were to be rejected. He, therefore, declared the final list of candidates elected unopposed while holding that the private respondents, four in number, are ineligible to contest the election for the office bearers of the GCA.

7. The decision of the PO dated 10.08.2021 was challenged by respondents, before the EC in terms of the code of ethics and the said commission vide order dated 19.10.2021 rejected the objections and set aside the decision passed by the PO. The decision passed by the EC dated 19.10.2021 was challenged by the petitioners before the AA and in terms of the impugned decision dated 14.12.2021, the AA has rejected the same, therefore, the petitioners have approached this court.

8. Mr. Nikhil Nayyar, learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the decisions passed by the EC and the AA are in contravention of the Rules and Regulations which were amended in terms of the minutes of the special general body meeting dated 08.01.2017. According to him, if Rule 42(I)(a) of the Rules and Regulations is perused, the same would indicate that from one taluka, only one delegate can contest the election and according to him, such an interpretation has to be given in view of the minutes of the meeting dated 08.01.2017.

9. He submits that the decision dated 08.01.2017 was taken by the general body so as to ensure that all talukas are represented in the Executive Committee of the GCA. He, therefore, states that any other interpretation would amount to nullifying the basic mandate behind the amendment incorporated in the minutes of the meeting dated 08.01.2017 and also the same would violate the mandate of Rule 42(I)(a) of the Rules and Regulations. He clarifies that at the initial stage, there can be two nominees authorised by the concerned taluka. However, befo