SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Del) 13777

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Tejas Karia, J
Anush Agarwalla – Appellant
Versus
Ad-Hoc Committee For Governance Of Equestrian Federation Of India – Respondent
LPA 458/2026|LPA 459/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Rahul Mehra, Astha Sharma, Anju Thomas, Mantika Haryani, Pratibha Yadav, Bhanu Mishra, Jyotika, Chaitanya Gosain, H. Chimthanawala, Kirtiman Singh, Kritika Gupta, Mohit Kumar Sharma, Ritwik Saha, M. Khurana
For the Respondents: Tanmay Mehta, Kapil Modi, Niyati Kohli, Rishabh Parikh, Sandeep Dewan, Chetan Sharma, Udit Dedhiya, Amit Gupta, R.V. Prabhat, Shubham Sharma, Yash Wardhan Sharma, Apurva Sachdev, Priyansh Gupta, Kumudavalli Seetharaman, Geetika Vyas, George Mathew, Shiv Verma, Kirat Singh Nagra, Kartik Yadav, Sumedha Chadha

Courts will not interfere with expert selection decisions unless they are arbitrary or contrary to law. However, procedural non-compliance with notified selection criteria is reviewable, though judicial restraint is exercised when correcting the error would be logistically impossible and detrimental to broader national sporting interests.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Law - Judicial Review - Selection Process - Sports Administration - Non-interference in expert committee decisions - Unless decision-making process is arbitrary, irrational, or contrary to law, courts should not substitute their view for that of selection committee - Principles of judicial review in sports governance apply when selection process flouts published criteria - Deviation from advertised procedure without legal necessity undermines fairness. (Paras 32, 33 and 57)

(B) Sports Law - Selection Criteria - Performance Evaluation - Compliance with published guidelines is mandatory for sports governing bodies - Rules cannot be amended or dispensed with to suit administrative convenience without invoking specific enabling provisions - Failure to act in accordance with mandated training and review mechanisms constitutes procedural irregularity. (Paras 35, 41, 42 and 55)

Facts of the case:
Appellants challenged a decision regarding the composition of a national team for an international multi-sport event. The grievance concerned the selection list, specifically the failure of the governing body to conduct mandatory performance reviews as stipulated in the selection criteria, and the opaque methodology used for comparative merit ranking. Ad-hoc committee had bypassed steps requiring training competitions for probables and failed to publish a provisional merit list as per the guidelines.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the governing body failed to comply with the mandatory procedural requirements for finalization of the team. However, due to the imminent deadline and the practical impossibility of restructuring the selection process within a short timeframe without causing irreparable harm to the national team's preparations, the court declined to exercise its jurisdiction to set aside the selection list.

Issues: Whether the governing body adhered to the published selection criteria in the evaluation of candidates, and whether the non-compliance with mandatory procedural stages justifies judicial intervention at the eleventh hour.

Ratio Decidendi: While judicial review is limited regarding the merits of sporting selections, it is permissible when the process is fundamentally flawed or contrary to the notified criteria. However, even if procedural lapses exist, if the court finds that the operational timeline is too compressed to permit a fresh selection without jeopardizing the country’s participation, it may, in the interest of the sport, refuse to interfere with the outcome.

Result: Appeals disposed of without interference with the impugned judgment.

Table of Content
1. establishment of selection criteria and background facts for efi dressage team. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
2. parties' contentions regarding the transparency and technicality of the selection process. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28)
3. court's restraint in interfering with expert selection processes despite procedural deviations. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59)

JUDGMENT

TEJAS KARIA, J

1. The present Appeals arise out of the common judgment dated 29.06.2026 (“Impugned Judgment”) passed in W.P.(C) No. 8329/2026 and W.P.(C) No. 8290/2026 (“Writ Petitions”).

2. The Writ Petitions were instituted assailing the Selection Process adopted by the Ad-Hoc Committee of the Equestrian Federation of India (“EFI”) in issuing the selection list dated 16.06.2026 (“Selection List”) for participation in the Equestrian discipline of Dressage at the 20th Asian Games, scheduled to be held in Japan from 19.09.2026 to 04.10.2026 (“Asian Games”).

FACTUAL BACKGROUND:

3. EFI is the National Sports Federation (“NSF”) for Equestrian Sports in India and is recognised by the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, Government of India (“Ministry”), the Indian Olympic Association (“IOA”) and the Federation Equestre Internationale (“FEI”).

4. In 2025, the Ministry issued a notification formulating the Selection Criteria for the Asian Games, Para-Asian Games 2026 and other multi-sport events.

5. On 12.02.2026, EFI issued Selection Criteria Version 4.0 (“Selection Criteria”) for selection of the Indian Equestrian Team for the Asian Games, prescribing the qualifying period, Minimum Eligibility Requirements (“MER”) and the method for evaluation of riders on the basis of comparative merit by the Selection Committee to be appointed by EFI (“Selection Committee”).

6. Under the Selection Criteria for qualification for the Asian Games, all riders were required to participate in the Selection Process across three (3) disciplines, namely Dressage, Show Jumping and Eventing.

7. For the purposes of the present Appeals, the relevant criteria pertain only to the Dressage Event of the Asian Games, which comprise of both Team and Individual competitions conducted in a mixed format. The first day would comprise of the Team Competition and the First Individual Qualifier Competition, followed by the Second Individual Qualifier Competition on the second day and the Individual Final Competition on the third day. For qualification in the Dressage Event, riders are permitted to compete in up to three (3) nominated qualifying competitions during the MER window and, for determination of the order of merit, the best two (2) results in which MERs had been achieved within the prescribed limits are to be considered. The Selection Procedure further provides that up to six (6) riders, described as Probables, would be shortlisted based on the competitive merit of each horse-rider combination. For inclusion in the list of Probables, each horse-rider combination was required to achieve at least one (1) valid MER within the prescribed limits, and participation in at least one (1) out of the three (3) competitions was mandatory. In respect of the Dressage Event, the highest cumulative score was to be taken into consideration for determining merit. The six (6) Probables shortlisted based on MERs/Results in the Selection Trials, and the three (3) or four (4) riders securing the highest scores, were to be selected as the final Team nominees on merit to represent India.

8. In terms of Clause 5(c)(i) of the Selection Criteria, riders based abroad who intend to participate in the Selection Trials are required to intimate EFI, by SMS, e-mail or WhatsApp, at least seven (7) days prior to the date of the first horse inspection for each trial.

9. Clause 8(d) of the Selection Criteria pr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top