Delhi HC orders stay on IOA ad hoc committee forming new national sports association for Ski and Snowboard India
The Delhi High Court has intervened in the matter of Ski and Snowboard India. The court has restrained the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) ad-hoc committee. The committee was planning to form a new national sports association. Justice Sachin Datta issued the interim order. The court observed that the ad-hoc committee's actions exceeded its authority.
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
The Delhi High Court has in an interim order directed the Indian Olympic Association ad-hoc committee overseeing the affairs of Ski and Snowboard India to not take any steps on the formation of a new national sports association Justice Sachin Datta said the ad-hoc committee seeking to create a new national sports association was prima facie "way beyond the scope of authority" of the IOA and ordered a stay till the next hearing on July 8.The judge passed the order as it issued notice on the application by Ski and Snowboard India (SSI).SSI had approached the court against a notice issued by the ad hoc committee on May 6 to the affiliated state associations inviting them for the 'First General Meeting for Registration and Election of the New National Sports Association (NSA) for Ski and Snowboard India'.In the order passed on May 23, the court granted time to the counsel for the IOA to state whether there was any provision in the IOA constitution which authorised the IOA or its ad-hoc committee to act in this manner, and sought replies from the IOA and Centre."In the present case, not only has an 'Ad-hoc Committee' been constituted, the said Committee is seeking to create a 'new NSA' out of the petitioner. Prima facie, this is way beyond the scope of authority of the IOA," the court said."In the circumstances, till the next date of hearing, the Ad-hoc Committee constituted vide office order 13.10.2023, shall refrain from taking any steps pursuant to the aforesaid letter / notice dated 06.05.2025," the court ordered.The court also noted that the order constituting the ad-hoc committee on October 13, 2023 could not be construed as conferring authority on the committee to create a new body and requiring entities affiliated to the petitioner to participate in the process.Prima facie, in the guise of appointing an ad-hoc committee to manage the affairs of the petitioner, it is impermissible to change the juristic nature and foundational character of the society, it added.The application by Ski and Snowboard India, represented by counsel Neha Singh, was part of its petition challenging the constitution of the ad-hoc committee to take over its affairs.Aaccording to the petitioner, the ad-hoc committee was formed without any show cause notice to the body and after October 2023, the petitioner wrote to the IOA and the Centre on several occasions for redressal of its grievances.The petitioner said the formation of the ad-hoc committee was ordered in a unilateral, illegal and arbitrary manner, in grave violation of natural Justice and the Sports Code.It was stated that the petitioner was not intimated about or given any show-cause notice or hearing with respect to any alleged complaints which led to the decision to form the ad-hoc committee to manage its affairs.The petition further said the IOA president passed the direction without consulting the executive committee as per the IOA Constitution.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Court order seeking FIR in EDC land fraud matter stayed
Panaji: The high court of Bombay at Goa stayed the order of a North Goa court directing the anti-corruption branch (ACB) of the directorate of vigilance to register a first information report (FIR) in connection with allegations of fraud related to land allotment at EDC, Patto. Initially, the trial court had directed the CBI to register the FIR but later assigned the task to the ACB. S Karpe, additional public prosecutor said that the order passed by the sessions court judge at Panaji in the criminal case did not take into consideration the consent as contemplated under Section 17(A) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, as amended in 2018. According to the counsel, there was no reason given by the trial court for arriving at the conclusion that the FIR needs to be registered within 24 hours in accordance with the complaint. Subsequently, an application was filed for an extension of time, which was granted by the sessions court on June 19, extending the same by 48 hours. 'Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on July 11, 2025. Notice be issued by all the available modes of service. In the meantime, the effect and operation of the order dated June 9, 2025, shall be stayed till the next date,' Justice Nivedita Mehta observed. Activists had moved the court alleging that govt property was allotted to EDC to house certain offices, but they allegedly leased and sold land without obtaining permission from the govt, causing a loss of Rs 300 crore to the state exchequer. Even if permission was obtained, they ought to have deposited 50% of the amount with the govt or the EDC, which has not been done, the activists had alleged. 'In the present case, the FIR ought to have been registered. There is nothing exceptional in the present case that warrants a delay in the registration of an FIR on the ground of a preliminary inquiry. Even if there were exceptional circumstances in the case, any preliminary inquiry could not have, under any circumstances, exceeded two days,' the sessions court Judge Irshad Agha had stated. 'In the present case, the FIR ought to have been registered and a preliminary inquiry ought to have been carried out by the investigating agency. However, there is enough material to directly register the FIR,' the judge had said.
The Hindu
6 hours ago
- The Hindu
Invoking anti-gangster law to counter one communal violence incident triggered by a social media post is misuse: SC
The Supreme Court has concluded that the use of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters Act — a law meant to counter organised crime — in a solitary case of communal disturbance caused by an 'incendiary' social media post, amounts to a misuse of the stringent penal law. The recent judgment, authored by Justice Sandeep Mehta, came after the court heard an appeal filed by people accused under the State law for mobbing and vandalising the business establishment of a man who posted content derogatory to a particular religion on social media. 'When juxtaposed with the object and intent of the U.P. Gangsters Act, which was enacted to combat organised gang-based crime and dismantle criminal syndicates that pose a persistent threat to public order, the application of the Act to the appellants based on a single incident of communal violence flaring up from an incendiary post made against a particular religion represents a significant departure from its legislative purpose,' Justice Mehta wrote. 'Colourable exercise of power' The judgment said the application of the Gangsters Act in the current case bore the 'hallmark of colourable exercise of power for purposes extraneous to the Act's legitimate objectives'. The court reminded the State government of Article 21 of the Constitution that 'no person shall be deprived of life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law'. Justice Mehta observed that the procedure prescribed by law must be fair, just, reasonable, and not arbitrary, presumptive, or oppressive. The constitutional guarantee of personal liberty acquired even greater significance when an 'extraordinary legislation with stringent provisions' like the U.P. Gangsters Act was invoked by the State, he said. 'The power conferred upon the State cannot be wielded as an instrument of harassment or intimidation, particularly where political motivations may be at play,' Justice Mehta emphasised. 'Need solid evidence' Extraordinary penal provisions, particularly those that substantially abridge regular procedural safeguards like the U.P. Gangsters Act, must be invoked only if the evidence met a threshold of credibility and substantiality. 'The materials relied upon must establish a reasonable nexus between the accused and the alleged criminal activity… When a statute creates serious fetters on personal liberty, the evidentiary foundation for its invocation must be commensurately strong, supported by concrete, verifiable facts rather than vague assertions,' the top court held. Quashing the FIR and allowing the appeal, the court said the case failed to meet the 'essential threshold' required to invoke the Gangsters Act. It had rested 'largely on presumptive theories rather than presenting tangible material to establish the probability that the appellants were engaged in organised criminal activity,' the court said.
New Indian Express
13 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Telangana HC seeks explanation over delay in opening government hospital
HYDERABAD: The Telangana High Court on Wednesday pulled up the state government for the inordinate delay in making operational a fully constructed and equipped 100-bedded government hospital in Alampur, Jogulamba Gadwal district. The court directed the government to file its response within two weeks, explaining the reasons for not commencing regular medical services at the facility. A division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Renuka Yara expressed serious concern over the continued inaction, questioning why the hospital - built at a cost of Rs 21 crore and completed in October 2023 - remains non-functional even 18 months after completion. During the hearing, Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul observed, 'A 100-bedded hospital has been constructed in Alampur, but the state government is not opening it, not providing staff, and the equipment remains unused.' The Bench directed the government counsel to obtain clear instructions from relevant departments on the reasons for the delay. The directive came in response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by social activist and politician S Ramchandra Reddy, a resident of Ieeja in Jogulamba Gadwal district. The petitioner alleged that despite several representations to the authorities, the hospital has not been made functional, depriving the people of Alampur of basic medical services.
