Hockey Odisha vs Union Of India And Others

Arindam Sinha, J

Mr. Mohapatra, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and commences argument in reply. He refers to letter dated 31st December, 2020 of Hockey India and points out that there was allegation of three omissions on part of his client, to deliver. By the letter his client was reduced to being associate member, with effect from next day, i.e., 1st January, 2021. On query from Court he submits, no challenge was mounted against this act of Hockey India.

Moving on to letter dated 23rd January, 2021 of Hockey India he submits, further and other requisitions on alleged omissions by his client were made thereby. The next letter from Hockey India is dated

23 rd February, 2021. He submits, by that letter 45 day’s notice was given to comply with yet more number of requisitions.

By letter dated 24th March, 2021 there were again requisitions made and 30 days final notice given by Hockey India for his client to comply with. He submits, annexure 19 series are compliances by his client commencing with letter dated 5th March, 2021. By letter dated 16th April, 2021 there was information given to Hockey India that his client had updated its website as per the guidelines. Referring to annexures 21 and 22 he submits, special general meeting of his client was duly held in further compliance of the requisitions. In the circumstances, impugned letter dated 7th June, 2021 was without basis and should be set aside and quashed. He prays for adjournment to conclude on facts and rely upon law.

Mr. Phalpher, learned advocate appears on behalf of Indian Olympic Association (IOA) and submits, requirements under Sports Code clauses 3.10 and 3.19 were not complied with in disaffiliation of Hockey Odisha.

By consent list on 2nd November, 2022.

................................................