Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 64170
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
S.MANIKUMAR, CJ, SHAJI P.CHALY, J
SUNIL SEBASTIAN – Appellant
Versus
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA – Respondent
WA 2668 2015
SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.), SRI.S.M.PRASANTH, SMT.ASHA BABU, SRI.G.RENJITH, SRI.K.ANAND, SMT.LATHA ANAND, SC, KERALA STATE SPORTS COUNCIL
Amendments made to the Kerala Sports Act were deemed unconstitutional, but issues became moot due to subsequent developments.
Headnote:
Constitutional - Kerala Sports Act - Sections 3, 5, 6 & 9 - The court assessed the constitutionality of the amendments made by Act No. 1 of 2016. It held that the amendments were unconstitutional and would not affect the elected members' tenures.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners contested the amendments to the Kerala Sports Act, claiming they were unconstitutional and sought to retain their positions on various district sports councils until their terms expired.
Finding of the Court:
The court determined that due to the submission of the counsel indicating that the matter was infructuous, the petitions could not proceed.
Issues: Whether the amendments to the Kerala Sports Act were unconstitutional and if the petitioners were entitled to continue in their positions despite the amendments.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the submissions made by the appellants rendered the petitions without further purpose, leading to their dismissal.
Final Decision: The writ appeals are dismissed as infructuous.
J U D G M E N T
S. Manikumar, C. J.
Before the writ court, in W. P. (C) No. 29635 of 2015, petitioners have sought for the following reliefs:- “(i) To declare that the amendment of Sections 3 , 5, 6 &
9 of Kerala Sports Act by Act No. 1 of 2016 and other Sections which are impugned in this Writ Petition is unconstitutional, void, ultra vires and inoperative and is liable to be struck down;
(ii) To declare that the petitioners are entitled to continue as elected members of the Malappuram District Sports Council and Kannur District Sports Council, till their normal tenure expires;
(iii) To issue a Writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents to continue the petitioners as elected members of Malappuram District Sports Council and Kannur District Sports Council irrespective of issuance of Kerala Sports Amendment Act, 2015 (Act 1 of 2016).”
2. Before the writ court, in W. P. (C) No. 30689 of 2015, petitioners have sought for the following reliefs:- “i) To declare that the amendment of Sections 3 , 5, 6 & 9 of Kerala Sports Act by Act No. 1 of 2016 and other Sections which are impugned in this Writ Petition is unconstitutional, void, ultra vires and inoperative and is liable to be struck down.
ii) To declare that the petitioners are entitled to continue as elected members of the Idukki District Sports Council, Kasaragod District Sports Council and Palakkad District Sports Council, till their normal tenure expires.
iii) To issue a Writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents to continue the petitioners as elected members of Malappuram District Sports Council and Kannur District Sports Council irrespective of issuance of Kerala Sports Amendment Act, 2015 (Act 1 of 2016).
iv) To issue a Writ of Mandamus commanding the respondents to continue the petitioners as elected members of the Idukki District Sports Council, Kasaragod District Sports Council and Palakkad District Sports Council and also the 2nd and 4th petitioners as elected members of the Kerala State Sports Council representing the Kasaragod District Sports Council and Palakkad District Sports Council respectively irrespective of the issuance of Ordinance No. 12 of 2015.”
3. Today, when the writ appeals came up for hearing, Mr. S. M.
Prasanth, learned counsel for the appellants, submitted that the subject matter of the writ appeals has become infructuous.
Placing on record the above submission, instant writ appeals are dismissed as infructuous.
