IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA WRIT PETITION No.10001 of 2026

27^th DAY OF APRIL, 2026 Between:

Akula Sai Chandra.

…Petitioner AND The State of Telangana and four others.

...Respondents

ORDER:

Heard Sri P. Venugopal, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri Nimmaraboina Naveen, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri G. Praveen Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Sports, for respondent No.1 and Sri A. Venkatesh, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri Vadeendra Joshi, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the entire record

2. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, with the following prayer:

“…to issue a writ or direction, more particularly one in the nature of

Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of Respondents in not

implementing the order dated 24.03.2026 passed by the Hon'ble Ombudsman of the Hyderabad Cricket Association and in refusing to accept the subscription fee for A-Division for the season 2026-27 from Rohit XI Cricket Club as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Bye-laws and unconstitutional; and consequently direct the Respondents to forthwith implement the order dated 24.03.2026 passed by the Hon'ble Ombudsman and to pass such other order...”

Case of the petitioner:

3. The petitioner is a registered cricket player of Rohit XI Cricket Club, bearing player ID No.HCAA00073 and currently an under-19 player, representing the Hyderabad Cricket Association (‘HCA’). The petitioner is participating in competitive cricket in the teams functioning under the aegis of Hyderabad Cricket Association for about a decade. The petitioner's future prospects, including opportunity to play higher level cricket, is dependent upon his continued participation in officially recognized matches and tournaments conducted by the Hyderabad Cricket Association i.e. respondent. No.2. The Rohit XI Cricket Club, to which the petitioner belongs, has performed well throughout the league stage and has successfully qualified for the semi-finals of the tournament based on merit and performance on the field. At that stage, there was a dispute between the eligibility of one player of Rohit XI Cricket Club by name Chittineni Srihith. Due to said issue, respondent No.4 i.e. the Chief Executive Officer of respondent No.2 issued a communication dated 13.02.2026 under the caption ‘Final decision regarding eligibility of player Mr. Chittineni Srihith HCA-B Division League Championship 2025-26’. By the said communication, respondent No.4 arbitrarily awarded the semi-final match to Imperial Cricket Club and in addition imposed suspension on Chittineni Srihith from participating in all HCA recognized cricket tournaments for a period of two years with effect from 13.02.2026. The decision was taken by respondent No.4 without giving an opportunity of hearing to the concerned player or to Rohit XI Cricket Club. The action is in violation of principles of natural justice and therefore, liable to be set aside.

4. There is a procedure laid down under the bye-laws of the respondent No.2 under Section 41(1)(c) in case of misconduct or breach which has to be adjudicated as per prescribed statutory procedure by the Apex Council, with a preliminary enquiry by Chief Executive Officer, submission of report and adjudication by the Ombudsman by duly giving an opportunity of hearing, whereas respondent No.4 did not follow any such mandatory procedure and exercised powers arbitrarily. On account of the illegal action against the Rohit XI Cricket Club, said club approached the Ombudsman of respondent No.2-Association by filing case No.2 of 2026 challenging the communication dated 13.02.2026 issued by respondent No.4. The Ombudsman vide proceedings dated 25.02.2026 recognized the issue raised by the club and recorded that the procedure prescribed under Section 41 (c)

of bye-laws had not been implemented. In view of urgency of the matter i.e. impending semi-final and final matches