IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA, J.
Mr. Rishiket Sisodia - Appellant
Vs.
The State of Telangana - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 28136 of 2024
Decided on : 03-04-2025
ORDER :
Petitioner is a budding cricketer aged about 22 and is residing in Hyderabad. He approached this Court to declare the notification dated 07.11.2023 issued by the 3rd respondent based on the resolution made during the first Apex Council meeting, introducing the minimum of 5 years of domicile within the state of Telangana (Team Hyderabad) for all age group categories, for selection into the State Team, as violation of fundamental right, especially under Article 14 & 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India.
It is the case of petitioner that he born in Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh and later moved to Hyderabad, Telangana in the end of 2017. He is passionate about cricket and is actively pursuing the sport. In 2018, he started playing league matches in various categories and tournaments in Hyderabad. In 2019, he scored over 1800 runs in the HCA season, which included three double hundreds. Based on this performance, he was selected for Hyderabad Under-19 team for Vinoo Mankad and Cooch Behar Trophies. In 2021, he was selected as a probable for Under-25 team and in 2023, he was one of the top scorers and was selected for Hyderabad Under-23 One Day Team. The assertions about the performance of petitioner in the matches were not disputed by the 2nd respondent -Association.
While the matter stood thus, on 07.11.2023, a formal notification/order was issued by the 3rd respondent - President of the 2nd respondent to the effect that “In accordance with the resolution made during the 1st Apex Council Meeting, pertaining to the domicile criteria for eligibility to represented the State of Telangana (Team Hyderabad) in all age group categories for both men and women, it mandates that a player must demonstrate a minimum of 5-years of domicile within the state of Telangana to qualify the selection". The said order is impugned in this Writ Petition.
2. Sri P. Raja Sripathi Rao, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Aditya Vyas, counsel for petitioner submits that the 3rd respondent does not have the power, authority and jurisdiction to pass the impugned order under the bye-laws/Rules and Regulations of the 2nd respondent Association. As per bye-laws/Rules and Regulations of the Association, the Apex Council is to take decision with regard to implementation of domicile criteria and not the President of the Association. It is submitted that in the impugned order, reference is made with regard to the resolution that is purported to have been passed in the 1st Apex Council Meeting to the effect of introducing the domicile criteria. The 1st Apex Council Meeting was held on 25.10.2023 and on perusal of the Minutes of the Meeting, there is no such agenda and decision that was taken for introduction and implementation of the domicile criteria as mentioned in the mentioned in the impugned order. According to learned Senior Counsel, the 2nd respondent constituted a Three-Member Committee to look into the cricketing operations, to oversee fairness and selection of various cricket teams of Hyderabad, men and women in all categories by the selectors for 2023-24; after considering the bye-laws/Rules and Regulations of the Association, the Three- Member Committee had observed as hereunder: -
DOMICILE REQUIREMENTS:
Many outstation players and those settled in Hyderabad or anywhere in Telangana State are being given opportunities without any specified criteria to represent. The Hyderabad Cricket Association teams in various levels. Many parents and players and others are not appreciating this as the hardworking cricketers as players of Telangana are losing their opportunities. Since, migration of cricketers all over the country happen in all associations. There is a need to frame certain conditions for cricketers born in other states to represent our state teams.
3. The 2nd respondent filed its counter contending that the selection committee is having exclusive authority to select Hyderabad Cricket Team from cricketers from the State of Telangana and tha
The President of the Association lacks authority to impose domicile criteria for team selection without Apex Council approval, violating Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.
A ban imposed on a player without proper inquiry and notice violates natural justice and is deemed arbitrary and illegal.
The imposition of a ban without due process and fair inquiry violates the principles of natural justice and constitutional rights under Articles 14 and 21.
The imposition of a ban by the CEO of the Hyderabad Cricket Association was arbitrary and violated principles of natural justice due to lack of authority and procedural adherence.
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.