P.P.THOBIYAS Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above writ petition is filed with following prayers:

(2.) Ext.P1 is a circular issued by the 4th respondent. The 1st petitioner is the former Junior Indian Football team Captain and former Indian Senior Football Team Player who also played for Kerala Police Football Team and retired form Government Service as the Commanding Chief Marshal in the Rank of Superintendent of Police. According to the 2nd petitioner, he is a reputed coach in India, who was honoured by the Prime Minister for his achievements in sports and is the Secretary of Santos Football Club registered with the 4th respondent. The 3rd petitioner is also claims to be a former football player, who claims that he played for Kerala Police and is presently a recognised coach in India recognised by the National Institute of Sports. The grievance of the petitioners is that as per Ext.P1 circular issued by the 4th respondent, an injustice is done to football lovers. According to the petitioners, Ext.P1 circular is issued by the 4th respondent in an unjust, illegal manner violating the right to equality guaranteed by the Constitution in total defiance to the rules and regulations to be followed. It is contended that the 4th respondent is conducting the Kerala Premier League (KPL for short) in total violation to equality and natural justice. The 4th respondent, in order to induct teamsof their choice, without formulating any rules and regulations is conducting the tournament in the name 'Kerala Premier League' without any authority. It is the grievance of the petitioners that huge amount is collected by the 4th respondent for entry to the tournament. According to the petitioners, unlike in the previous years, from this year onwards the 4th respondent has insisted for deposit of Rs.25,000.00 with tax as an eligibility criteria for participating in the State Championship League. This, according to the petitioners is unjust, illegal and arbitrary, because many clubs in the State are unable to join the tournament because of the lack of money that too during this tougher times of Covid-19. It is also stated that various institutional teams like Central Excise, Port Trust and various other institutional teams are also not participating because the institution does not permit for participating in such kind of tournaments. According to the petitioners, the above act of fixing Rs.25,000.00 with tax is done only by the Football Association of the State of Kerala and no other part of the country is receiving money from any of the football clubs for participating in the State League Tournament for a qualification to the 2nd division of the I-league. It is also alleged that Ext.P1 circular offers a corporate entry to the tournament. It is the case of the petitioners that the 4th respondent, in order to bring teams of their choice, has started a new entry called Corporate Entry, which permits any team directly to play the league, if they are ready to deposit 7.5 lakhs of rupees. According to the petitioners, the Kerala Football Association, who is accepting aid and grant from respondents 1 and 2 cannot be a money-making institution without promoting football. The 4th respondent Association itself is formed for promoting football and encourage the young general into football. Therefore, it is contended that Ext.P1 circular is illegal and is to be interfered with and to issue direction to respondent 1 to 3 to take over Kerala Premier League.

(3.) The 3rd respondent in its counter affidavit stated that State League/State Championship is exclusively under the management and control of the various member states in accordance with their rules and regulations. According to the 3rd respondent, a State Association may conduct selection for the I-league 2nd division in a manner as they deem fit. According to the 3rd resplendent, since the conduct of a state league/state championship is exclusively within the prerogative of each member states, dictated by their rules and regulations, the 3rd respondent is estopped from interfering in the conduct of the same and further frame rules for the same. According to the 3rd respondent, all member state football associations are independent bodies governed by their own constitution and own memorandum of association and articles of association, which they are mandated to follow bylaws. It is the case of the 3rd respondent that the 3rd respondent does not have the authority to interfere with the conduct of the state competitions.