F.I.R.A.C. – Rahul Mehra Vs. Union of India [W.P. (CW) 195/2010]

  • Home
  • Blog
  • F.I.R.A.C. – Rahul Mehra Vs. Union of India [W.P. (CW) 195/2010]
   No Comments
Facts of the case-

These developments ensued in a petition filed in 2010 by Senior Advocate Rahul Mehra asking the IOA and the National Sports Federation (NSF) to comply with the Sports Code and its rulings. The plea also sought that the recognition of non-compliance NSFs should be suspended or withdrawn and that benefits given to such non-compliant NSFs be not resumed till the constitution and administration of the IOA or NSF are brought into conformity with the Sports Code.

Issue Involved in the Case-

Whether there are set compliances in place to check the functioning of various NSFs under the code?

Analysis of the Case-

A division bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Najmi Wajiri saw that the Central and State Governments ought to truly consider establishing complete regulation on sports body acknowledgement and the executives that integrate best practices and the IOC Charter, without which no office should be conceded by any State or Union of India. Salient Features of the Judgment Passed dtd. 16/08/2022 are:

  • General Body as likewise the Executive Committee (EC) should have a base 25% representation with
    voting rights of prominent players with remarkable legitimacy.
  • Age and Tenure limitations will apply to all officials and not exclusively to the President, Secretary, and
    Treasurer.
  • Maximum tenure by any official can be a max of 3 terms (i.e. 12 years) with a cooling-off period.
  • The size of the Executive Committee (EC) of IOA will be 15 (7+8) and no more
  • No person with criminal antecedents will be eligible to be a part of the sports administration
  • All Commissions shall be independent
  • Compliance with the government sports code is mandatory and non-negotiable. All sports bodies which are in non-compliance or largesse from the public exchequer.
  • Governments, both Central and State, to consider introducing sports legislation

Bench appointed a three-membered Committee of Administrators (CoA) consisting of Mr Justice Anil R. Dave, former Judge of the Supreme Court, Dr S.Y. Quraishi, IAS, former Chief Election Commissioner & Mr Vikas Swarup, IFS, Former Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs. Moreover, Court appointed three consultant sportspersons namely, Abhinav Bindra (from Uttarakhand) Sport-Shooter, Olympic Gold Medalist, Anju Bobby George (from Kerala), Long Jump Olympian, Bombayla Devi Laishram (from Manipur), Archer Olympian, who shall assist in preparation and adoption of the IOA Constitution as per Sports Code and hold elections within 16 weeks from the date the CoA members give their assent.

What will be the Function of the CoA?

1. Assist in the preparation and adoption of the Constitution of IOA as per the Sports Code and court rulings;

2. Prepare the Electoral Roll/Electoral College for the purpose of conducting the elections to the Executive Committee in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, as may be proposed;

3. Carry out the day-to-day governance of IOA; (iv)

4. In discharging its task in terms of (iii) above, the CoA would be at liberty to take the assistance of the erstwhile EC of IOA which has continued thus far, in order to facilitate decisions being taken apropos the holding of tournaments, selection of players and all other matters necessary for the proper administration
and management of IOA;

5. The erstwhile Executive Committee of IOA shall forthwith hand over the charge to the CoA;

6. The CoA would be at liberty to make all appropriate arrangements for the governance of IOA until fresh elections are held in terms of a constitution conforming to the Sports Code and as noted hereinabove;

7. Facilitate the holding of elections and the handing over of the affairs to a democratically elected body in terms of its constitution which will be adopted, preferably within a period of 16 weeks from the date the CoA members give their assent.

Conclusion-

Administrative monitoring of compliance is supposed to be instant, strong and fastidious consistently. Yearly compliances are required for proceeding with acknowledgement. What is the compliance status of the NSFs presently, isn’t on the record. The apparent non-monitoring or specific monitoring or permissive monitoring by the specialists gives cause to residents to look for legal survey of something similar. This should be cured. The history of diligent stubbornness of the IOA for close to a portion of a century to follow the Sports Code, in spite of its
steady confirmation to the Government, the cultural worries and the bigger public great, make it basic that the IOA‟s issues be placed in the possession of a Committee of Administrators (CoA).

Related Posts

Author/post editor

Leave A Comment

AU Legal Services provides general legal information on this site, not specific legal advice. Viewing this content does not create an attorney-client relationship. For personalized legal guidance, please consult an attorney.Viewing or interacting with this website does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and AU Legal Services. An attorney-client relationship is only formed after a formal agreement is signed between AU Legal Services and the client.While AU Legal Services strives to keep information current and accurate, legal matters are complex and laws frequently change. We do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of information provided on this website, and AU Legal Services is not responsible for any errors or omissions.