IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
Sudhin V. Kaveri Nilayam - Petitioner
Versus
State of Kerala - Respondent
WP (C) No. 7456 of 2022
Decided On : 02-04-2025
(A) Kerala Sports Act, 2000 - Section 31 - Writ petition challenging refusal to countersign merit certificates by the Sports Council - Petitioner, a professional shooter, sought countersigning of certificates for eligibility for grace marks in public service selection - Sports Council's refusal based on alleged suspension of the Kerala State Rifle Association found to be incorrect - Court directed reconsideration of the request for countersigning certificates. (Paras 1 , 6 , 10 )
(B) Sports Administration - Importance of proper recognition and functioning of sports associations - Courts can intervene to ensure that participants are not prejudiced due to administrative disputes or non-recognition of associations. (Paras 7 , 10 )
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a professional shooter, participated in various championships and sought countersigning of certificates from the Sports Council for eligibility for grace marks in public service selection. The Sports Council refused, citing suspension of the Kerala State Rifle Association, which was later found to be incorrect.
Findings of Court:
The Sports Council's refusal to countersign the certificates was based on a mistaken belief regarding the status of the Kerala State Rifle Association, which remains a recognized body. The court ordered the Sports Council to reconsider the request for countersigning the certificates.
Issues: The main issues were the validity of the Sports Council's refusal to countersign the certificates and the implications of the association's administrative status on the petitioner's eligibility for grace marks.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Sports Council's refusal was based on incorrect information regarding the association's status and emphasized the need for proper recognition of sports associations to protect the rights of participants.
Result: Writ petition disposed of with directions to reconsider the request for countersigning the certificates.
JUDGMENT :
1. The above writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P6 and for a consequential direction commanding the 2nd respondent to countersign Exts.P3 and P4 certificates of the petitioner.
2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of the writ petition are as follows: The petitioner is a professional shooter who has participated in various shooting competition at the District, State and National level. Petitioner had participated in the Palakkad District Shooting Championship held by the Palakkad Rifle Association and was qualified for the State level Championship and Ext.P2 certificate of merits issued by the Palakkad District Rifle Association was counter signed by the observer of District Sports Council.
Thereafter, petitioner also participated in the 53rd Kerala State Shooting Championship held at Cherthala, Alappuzha during February 2021 conducted by the 3rd respondent,ie., the Kerala State Rifle Association and the petitioner stood 16th and 32nd position, as evident from Ext.P3 certificate. Later, he participated in the South Zone Shooting Championship held at Chennai and secured 11th position as evident from Ext.P4 certificate issued in this regard. During the time of competitions the 2nd respondent Sports Council was obliged to send an observer for the competitions and all merit certificates issued by the State Rifle Association and National Rifle Association shall be countersigned by the observer deputed by the 2nd respondent. The 3rd respondent Rifle Association had intimated about the event to the sports council and had requested them to send an observer as per Ext.P5 communication dated 24.1.2021. It is to be noted that Ext.P2 certificate was countersigned by the observer under the 2nd respondent whereas in Exts.P3 and P4, the Sports Council did not countersign. Petitioner has a case that his name has been included in the short list prepared by the Kerala Public Service Commission for selection to the post of Lower Division Clerk, Palakkad District. The petitioner is eligible for grace marks awarded to sports personnel in the selection process conducted by the PSC and the Public Service Commission will accept only those certificates countersigned by the 2nd respondent sports council. Hence the petitioner approached the 2nd respondent with a request to countersign Exts.P3 and P4 certificates and the 2nd respondent informed the petitioner that the Sports Council had withdrawn the recognition of the 3rd respondent Association and therefore the certificates cannot be countersigned by the 2nd respondent. Since the 2nd respondent refused to countersign Exts.P3 and P4 certificates the petitioner submitted a representation before the Sports Council and thereafter, approached this Court by filing WP(C) No.11779/2021 and this Court directed the Sports Council to take a decision on the representation. Accordingly, the application was considered and the request was rejected by Ext.P6 on the ground that the registration of the Kerala Rifle Association was suspended during the said period. Petitioner submits that after issuance of Ext.P6 an application was submitted before the 2nd respondent as per the provisions of the Right to Information Act seeking to get a copy of the order suspending the Kerala Rifle Association. By Ext.P8 communication petitioner was informed that the Sports Council has not suspended the Kerala Rifle Association and an Ad hoc Committee is in force. In the above facts and circumstances, petitioner would contend that the reason stated for rejecting the request for countersigning of the certificates as per Ext.P6 is without any basis. Petitioner would further submit that in similar situation, the State Amateur Boxing Association faced an issue of a non- recognition by the Sports Council and the sportsperson who participated under its banner were denied attestation, one of the participants approached this Court by filing WP(C) No.16388/2020 and this Court directed the Sports Council to consider the application
The court emphasized the necessity for sports associations to maintain proper recognition to ensure participants' rights and benefits are not compromised due to administrative disputes.
Observer-countersigned sports certificates must be provisionally endorsed to avoid prejudice despite disputes.
Disaffiliation by a national federation does not automatically mandate a state sports council to withdraw recognition under state law; such decisions require appropriate legal proceedings.
Denial of sports quota admission based on non-recognition of valid sports certificates was held unconstitutional, emphasizing equal treatment under the law for sports distinctions recognized by autho....
Eligibility for sports quota reservation must adhere to established criteria; rejecting valid sports certificates violates established policies.
The Kerala State Sports Council lacks authority to dissolve or intervene in the internal affairs of recognized sports associations as per the Kerala Sports Act, 2000.
The Sports Council can inquire about election irregularities in sports associations but cannot dissolve them or interfere in their internal elections.
The court upheld the validity of the Provisional Selection List by 'Kerala Hockey' while permitting the Sports Council to conduct an inquiry into the elections held under the National Sports Code.
The court held that compliance with the National Sports Development Code is mandatory for recognition of sports associations, validating the disaffiliation due to violations in governance and elector....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.