LAWS(SC)-2019-5-5

MAHARASHTRA ARCHERY ASSOCIATION Vs. RAHUL MEHRA

Decided On May 01, 2019
Maharashtra Archery Association Appellant
V/S
Rahul Mehra Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The respondent No. 1 has filed a public interest litigation before the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi, being Writ Petition (Civil) No. 195 of 2010, raising issues of transparency in governance and functioning of the Archery Association of India (for short the "AAI"). Several interim orders came to be passed in the said writ petition which are not relevant for answering the controversy in the present proceedings. The present special leave petitions emanate from the order dated 10th August, 2017 passed by the High Court in C.M. No. 10461 of 2017 filed by respondent No.1 (writ petitioner) inter alia for appointment of Administrator/Returning Officer including to conduct elections of AAI in compliance with the High Court's order dated 15th December, 2016, as well as stay of notice dated 2nd March, 2017 of the AAI, calling for an emergency meeting of the General Council on 15th March, 2017 and, in the alternative, to stay the outcome of such meeting if held, till the Court appoints an Administrator/Returning Officer. The High Court after hearing the parties passed the following order:

(3.) This decision is assailed by way of an appeal [arising out of SLP(C) Diary No.29577/2017] filed by Maharashtra Archery Association (for short "MAA"), appeal [arising out of SLP(C) Diary No. 28788/2017] filed by the Archery Association of India (for short "AAI"), and the appeal [arising out of SLP(C) Diary No. 29202/2017] filed by Kerala State Archery Association (for short "KSAA"). When these special leave petitions came up for hearing on 18th September, 2017, the Court recorded the submission of the appellant(s) that the constitution of AAI stood amended in accordance with the National Sports Development Code of India, 2011 (for short "the Sports Code"). The counsel appearing for Union of India prayed for time to verify the said position. Later, this Court directed the Ministry of Sports to file an affidavit regarding compliance, on or before 26th October, 2017. Eventually, the affidavit of the competent officer of the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, Government of India, came to be filed. It is not necessary for us to dilate on the contents of the said affidavit. For, the matters were heard on 4th December, 2017 whence, after hearing the parties, the Court proceeded to pass the following order: