Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Del) 424

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, C.J., Tejas Karia, J.
Uttar Pradesh Kho Kho Association - Appellant
Versus
Kho Kho Federation Of India & Ors. – Respondent
LPA 305 of 2026, CM APPL. 27219 of 2026, CM APPL. 27221 of 2026 & CM APPL. 27222 of 2026
Decided On : 04-06-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Sanjeev Mahajan, Ms. Vanshita Gupta and Mr. Siddhartha, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Mr. Raj Shekar Rao, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sachin Chopra, Mr. Anuj Tyagi, Ms. Maitry Kakade, Ms. Astha Gupta and Ms. Shreelekha Vyas, Advocates Mr. Devvrat Yadav, SPC with Mr. Nipun Jain, GP and Mr. Kush Garg, Advocates

Regulatory codes governing national organizations are clarificatory in nature and apply to all constituents. An electoral process founded on reliance upon non-existent judicial authority is fundamentally invalid, and complex factual disputes regarding organizational conduct are not suitable for determination within writ jurisdiction.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Law - Governing Guidelines - Applicability - Regulatory frameworks governing national federations and their units are clarificatory in nature; their enforcement against subordinate entities does not constitute retrospective application of law. (Paras 22, 23)

(B) Electoral Process - Integrity - Validity - Reliance upon non-existent judicial orders by an electoral official to bypass governing procedures fundamentally vitiates the electoral process from its inception. (Paras 6, 26, 29)

(C) Writ Jurisdiction - Scope - Disputed Questions of Fact - Allegations of fraudulent disaffiliation, financial mismanagement, or unauthorized parallel organizational structures involve complex evidentiary disputes that are not susceptible to summary determination under writ jurisdiction. (Paras 31, 32)

Facts of the case:
The appeal stemmed from the rejection of a petition seeking legal recognition of an elected executive committee. The election, overseen by a court-appointed official, was conducted under the belief that national sports guidelines were inapplicable based on an order purportedly issued by a high court, which was later discovered to be non-existent. Numerous allegations were raised concerning the procedural legitimacy of the committee and the status of organizational affiliation.

Findings of Court:
The court determined that the governing code for sports management is universally applicable to all affiliated units. It found that the election process was compromised by reliance on a fabricated judicial authority. The court further concluded that the contested issues regarding organizational conduct and alleged fraudulent actions required a full trial with evidentiary support, as they could not be resolved through pleadings alone.

Issues: The central questions addressed were whether the governing sports code applied retrospectively to the election, whether the election process was invalidated by reliance on a non-existent judicial order, and whether the court could adjudicate complex factual disputes regarding organizational affiliation in a writ proceeding.

Ratio Decidendi: Legal guidelines for internal management serve as clarification of pre-existing standard practices rather than new, retroactive requirements. Administrative processes founded upon misrepresented or non-existent judicial authority are inherently invalid. Where a case relies on intricate factual disputes over management and conduct, the court must decline to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction in favor of appropriate trial remedies.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. factual history of the dispute regarding affiliation and election process. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
2. appellant's contention against retrospective application of law and finality of elections. (Para 18)
3. respondent's contentions regarding non-compliance with the sports code. (Para 19)
4. the sports code applies to all constituents of national sports federations, including state units. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26)
5. participation in electoral processes does not waive rights to challenge illegal outcomes. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30)
6. disputed facts necessitating evidentiary enquiry cannot be adjudicated via writ jurisdiction. (Para 31 , 32)
7. dismissal of appeal with no order as to costs. (Para 33)

JUDGMENT :

TEJAS KARIA, J.

1. This intra-court Appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 18.02.2026 (“Impugned Judgment”) passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) 5375/2023 (“Writ Petition”), whereby the Appellant’s prayer for recognition of the elections of its Executive Committee (“EC”) held on 27.10.2021, was rejected and the Writ Petition was dismissed.

FACTUAL MATRIX

2. The Appellant is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, and is engaged in the promotion and development of the sport of Kho Kho in the State of Uttar Pradesh. Respondent No. 1 is the National Sports Federation governing the sport of Kho Kho in India. It has several affiliated State associations responsible for administering the sport within their respective States. Respondent No. 1 is also recognised by Respondent No. 3 and enjoys various facilities and concessions extended by the Government of India.

3. According to the Appellant, it was one of the founding members of Respondent No. 1 and continued to function as the affiliated association for the State of Uttar Pradesh until January 2020, when it was de-affiliated by Respondent No. 1 by office order dated 30.01.2020. The Appellant alleges that the said action was taken pursuant to a communication dated 19.12.2019 issued by its former President, stating that the Appellant had been dissolved on account of the then General Secretary’s failure to maintain and furnish documents sought by Respondent No. 1.

4. Further, by the aforesaid office order dated 30.01.2020, Respondent No. 1 constituted an Interim Committee (“IC”) to manage the affairs of the Appellant organization. It is the Appellant’s case that the said order was founded on the alleged dissolution of the Appellant by its then President, Mr. Sanjay Pratap Singh.

5. On 16.01.2021, the office bearers of District Kho Kho Association, Bijnor and District Kho Kho Association, Moradabad, both affiliated to the Appellant, instituted W.P.(C) 863/2021 challenging the validity of Respondent No. 1’s office order dated 30.01.2020, whereby the IC had been appointed to manage the Appellant’s affairs. The said writ petition was disposed of by order dated 09.08.2021, recording the agreement of the Parties that fresh elections be held under the supervision of a retired Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. Accordingly, this Court appointed Justice D.P. Singh, former Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, as the Returning Officer to conduct elections to the Executive Committee (“EC”) of the Appellant. It was further observed that, since the Parties were not ad idem with respect to the electoral college, the Returning Officer would finalise the same after considering the objections of all aggrieved Parties.

6. Pursuant to the aforesaid order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 863/2021, the Returning Officer conducted the elections to the Appellant’s EC and declared the results on 27.10.2021. The said elections were conducted on the basis of the observations recorded by the learned Returning Officer in his order dated 03.10.2021, wherein it was observed as under:

“Wherefore, after considering the Model Election Guidelines and the provision conta

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Del) 424

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHIDevendra Kumar Upadhyaya, C.J., Tejas Karia, J.Uttar Pradesh Kho Kho Association - AppellantVersusKho Kho Federation Of India & Ors. – RespondentLPA 305 of 2026, CM APPL. 27219 of 2026, CM APPL. 27221 of 2026 & CM APPL. 27222 of 2026Decided On : 04-06-2026