AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioner, by the present petition, had challenged the selection of the petitioner in the National Games. When the petition was filed on 06.04.2015, this Court had issued a limited notice to the respondents seeking their view on paragraph 5 of the said order.
Paragraph 5 of the order dated 06.04.2015 reads as under:- "Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent no.2, I am prima facie of the view that a mechanism has to be put in place, which enables complaints to be lodged much prior to the date when games are slated to commence. A mechanism whereby, complaints are entertained and opportunity is given to the players against whom complaints are lodged and, thereafter adjudicated upon, has to be put in place. The mechanism has to be one which is fair and gives reasonable opportunity both to the complainant as well as the one against whom complaint is made i.e., the respondent."
Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports has recently constituted a Committee to review the provisions of existing National Sports Code Development of India, in the light of the recent developments and to submit its recommendations. The Committee, it is stated, is examining all issues relating to good governance in Sports including Athletes Grievance Redressal.
In my view, the petition can be disposed of by directing the Committee constituted by the respondents to also examine the prima facie view formed by this Court on 06.04.2015 as noticed in paragraph 5 extracted hereinabove.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of directing the respondent to place this order before the Committee constituted by it for reviewing the existing National Sports Code Development of India.
The Committee would also take into account the prima facie view expressed by this court in paragraph 5 of order dated 06.04.2015, extracted hereinabove
It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the view noted in the extracted paragraph 5 is a prima facie view. The Committee would be free to examine the same in light of the material before the Committee and take a view in the matter without treating paragraph 5 as a mandate to the Committee.
The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.