Badminton Association Of India vs Union Of India & Others

S.G. Pandit, J

We have heard the learned senior counsel Sri.K.N.Phanindra for learned counsel Sri.Dilli Rajan for Sri.Subba Reddy.K.N., for appellant, learned senior counsel Sri.Udaya Holla for Sri.Lomesh Kiran, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and learned senior counsel Sri.Srinivasan Raghavan.V., for Sri.Lomesh Kiran, learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4.

This writ appeal is against interim order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.15525/2023, which reads as follows:

“15. Having heard the learned Senior Counsels and on perusing the material available on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that having regard to the chronology of events and the fact that the players have already participated in the auction and evinced interest in participating in the Tournament and the Tournament is scheduled to commence from 27th of August, 2023, the participation of the players in the Tournament should not be curtailed at the hands of this Court. The contentious issue raised in this writ petition requires consideration. This Court is also of the opinion that participation of the players and seeking their opinion in the matter would also become essential. It was brought to the notice of this Court that one of the players has already filed a writ petition and since this Court had no roster, the writ petition had come before the Bench having roster this morning. However, appropriate directions will have to be secured at the hands of the Hon’ble The Chief Justice to place the said writ petition before this Court to be heard along with this matter.

Moreover, since it is not disputed at the hands of the respondent-BAI that the interim orders passed by the High Court of Madras has not been disturbed till date, this Court should lean in favour of granting interim relief.

Consequently, the petitioners shall not be prevented from conducting the Tournament as scheduled. If the players have already given their consent and have participated in the auction which was conducted, then the players who are selected may proceed to participate in the Tournament. However, it is made clear that the permission granted by this Court to the players to participate in the Tournament conducted at the hands of the 1st petitioner shall not be treated as any decision given on the merits of the matter or it shall not be taken as a precedent.

The respondents are requested to file their statement of objections at the earliest and if the pleadings are completed, the matter will be taken up for ‘Final Hearing’.

Re-list this matter on 12.09.2023.”

Learned senior counsel Sri.k.N.Phanindra for appellant-Association would submit that learned Single Judge permitted the players who are members of the appellant-Association to participate in the tournament to be conducted by the second respondent herein contrary to Bye-laws of the appellant-Association as well as Badminton World Federation Regulations (BWF). It is submitted that the members affiliated to the appellant-Association cannot participate in the unrecognized tournament. The tournament to be conducted by the second respondent herein is not recognized by the Badminton Association of India (BAI). Learned senior counsel inviting attention of this Court to the Regulations of the Badminton World Federation, submits that if any player and member of the BWF participate in the unrecognized tournament, they would attract sanctions in terms of Bye-laws of BWF as well as BAI.

We have perused the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge. Learned Single Judge due to paucity of time has not decided any contentions of the parties. Though the learned senior counsel urged several contentions we do not propose to examine those contentions, as the learned Single Judge has not yet decided the issues raised by the parties and examining those contentions at this stage may prejudice the case of both the parties.

Learned senior counsel appearing for the parties would submit that the tournament to be conducted by the second respondent is scheduled to commence from 27th August 2023.

Taking note of the said fact learned Single Judge permitted the players to participate in the tournament. Learned Single Judge has left open the question of maintainability also. Learned Single Judge has made it clear that permission granted to the players to participate in the tournament to be conducted at the hands of the second respondent herein shall not be treated as any decision given on the merits of the matter or it shall not be taken as a precedent.

In view of the above order passed by the learned Single Judge, where he has not adverted to merits of the contentions, including the issue of maintainability, it may note be appropriate for this Court at this stage to examine those issues. We are of the opinion that the interest of the sport namely badminton should ultimately prevail. We are not inclined to interfere with the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge. But, however, interim order passed by the learned Single Judge would be subject to outcome of the writ petition.

With the above, Writ Appeal stands disposed of.