Back
NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
Nalgonda District Cricket Association – Appellant
Versus
Hyderabad Cricket Association – Respondent
ORDER :
Nagesh Bheemapaka, J.
1. Challenging the Order dated 14.06.2024 passed by the Ethics Officer and Ombudsman Additional Charge of Hyderabad Cricket Association in Case No. 1 of 2024, present Writ Petition was filed seeking a mandamus to declare the said order as not according to law, illegal and arbitrary.
2. Heard Sri Sharad Sanghi, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri M. Hareesh Kumar, learned counsel for the 1st respondent - Hyderabad Cricket Association and Sri Zeeshan Adnan Mahmood, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent.
3. The 2nd respondent filed counter and petitioner filed a rejoinder to the same. With the consent of all the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage.
4. The case of petitioner Association is that their Society was registered in 2006 and is affiliated to Hyderabad Cricket Association. They paid annual fees for 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 and its Secretary Srinivas Chakravarthy has also been provided with Identity Card to attend SGM in 2011 and AGM in 2014. It is further their case that an OP. bearing S.O.P. No. 587 of 2011 was filed before the Principal District Judge, Nalgonda under Section 23 of the Societies Registrat
Writ petitions challenging orders of private club arbitrators are not maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution, especially when disputes are private and involve delay in asserting rights.
The High Court held that an Ombudsman cannot issue a direction to approach civil court without exercising its jurisdiction, particularly when a party fails to establish its claims.
decision of the Ombudsman shall be final and binding and shall come into force forthwith on being pronounced and delivered.
A litigant approaching the court seeking equity must come with clean hands and disclose all material facts. Suppression of material facts and failure to comply with court directions disqualify the li....
The court emphasized adherence to the Ethics Officer's directives for fair conduct of league matches, ruling against arbitrary decisions by governing bodies.
A writ under Article 226 is maintainable against the BCCI, and internal disputes within the BCA should be addressed by the BCCI Ombudsman.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
