JOA vs Supreme Court: SC rejects Jharkhand Olympic Association’s plea for special general meeting – The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a plea by the Jharkhand Olympic Association (JOA) seeking its green light to hold a special general meeting and asked it to await the Delhi High Court’s verdict on the matter. Follow InsideSport.IN for more updates
A vacation bench of Judges DY Chandrachud and Bela M Trivedi said: “We are not inclined to accept the request for special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution. The request for special leave is therefore dismissed. »
JOA vs Supreme Court: SC Rejects Jharkhand Olympic Association’s Plea for Special General Meeting
Also Read: Hockey India vs Supreme Court: After AIFF, Hockey India in Trouble for Sporting Code Violation, Supreme Court Places HI under CoA Rule
During the hearing, lead barrister Rahul Mehra, who was under protest, argued that the divisional bench of the Delhi High Court granted them the opportunity and said they should take care of their house in the wider interest of the sport.
“The High Court has said they are giving one last chance to resolve these issues otherwise we will take the case in hand and decide one way or another. They have been given the opportunity to do so. When a law and order situation was expected a retired judge of Delhi High Court Judge Rajiv Sahai Endlaw was appointed administrator for this particular meeting In this meeting all sorts of things happened produced and there was no solution, they couldn’t put their house in order”, he said.
Mehra, assisted by Barrister Anuj Tyagi, said the High Court Division Bench heard the case twice a week for almost four months, after which on April 12 judgment was reserved.
“We are all awaiting judgment and these petitions are coming now,” he said.
The bench then told lead attorney R Basant, representing the Jharkhand Olympic Association, that they would not accept the appeal.
JOA vs Supreme Court: SC Rejects Jharkhand Olympic Association’s Plea for Special General Meeting
Basant tried to persuade the bench by saying that long before judgment was reserved, this petition was filed and the only prayer in this petition is that a special general meeting should be held.
“Some urgent missions must be undertaken. Without the resolution of the association, these missions cannot be undertaken. The issue that was raised in the PIL has nothing to do with these issues,” he said.
The bench said, “It’s okay. Mr. Bsant. We don’t want this whole process to be disrupted. The judgment has been reserved by the High Court. The judges will deliver the judgment after the holidays. We don’t want the Jharkhand Olympic Association step in. Let the High Court solve the problem once and for all.”
The High Court had on April 12 reserved its verdict on a plea filed by senior lawyer and sports activist Rahul Mehra in 2010 seeking the adoption of a constitution by the Indian Olympic Association in line with the National Sports Code. (NSC) and the holding of elections. executive committees in accordance with standard guidelines and the constitution.
In his plea, Mehra argued that the Indian Olympic Associations (IOAs) and the NSF must align their constitution/bylaws strictly in terms of the NSC and with the laws of the country, in particular, as stated in the judgments and orders of the High Court and the Supreme Court; while the IOA must further abide by the IOC Charter in letter and spirit.
JOA vs Supreme Court: SC Rejects Jharkhand Olympic Association’s Plea for Special General Meeting
Mehra claimed “despicable inaction” by the Center regarding the alleged maladministration of 41 national sports federations (NSFs) and the IOA.
On November 6 last year, the High Court had asked the Center to show that the 41 DSPs recognized in October met the requirements of the National Sports Development Code of India, 2011.
He had ordered the ministry to show that each of the 41 DSPs, which have been recognized, have complied with all requirements of the sports code as these bodies are publicly funded.
Mehra had also claimed that none of the recognized DSPs had complied with the sport’s code.
The High Court had recalled that the Supreme Court has ruled on several occasions that recognition cannot be granted to a DSF which does not respect the sporting code.
Mehra, in his petition, argued that the decision granting recognition to 41 NSF is contrary to the National Sports Development Code of India, 2011 (sports code), and “issued in a completely arbitrary manner”.
JOA vs Supreme Court: SC Rejects Jharkhand Olympic Association’s Plea for Special General Meeting
The Supreme Court’s September 17, 2020 order was on appeal by the ministry against a February 7, 2020 High Court order, in Mehra’s 2010 petition, ordering that she be given advance notice by the government and the IOA before making any decision with respect to any NSF.
Subsequently, in October 2020, the Ministry granted recognition to 41 DSPs, “including those who were denied recognition until December 31, 2019, for breaching the sports code, and who breached it even on July 31, 2020,” the plea reads.
The petition claimed that the ministry spent nearly Rs 14,391.49 crore on sports activities from 2009-10 to 2018-19, and nearly Rs 1,237.56 crore was paid directly to NSF including IOA from 2009-10 to 2019-20 on the explicit, committing itself statutorily to respect the sports code.
JOA vs Supreme Court: SC Rejects Jharkhand Olympic Association’s Plea for Special General Meeting
Follow InsideSport on GOOGLE NEWS
