Delhi High Court
Ms Manika Batra vs Table Tennis Federation Of India ... on 23 September, 2021
Author: Rekha Palli
Bench: Rekha Palli
via video conferencing
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision : 23.09.2021
+ W.P.(C) 10590/2021 & CM APPL. 32671/2021 (interim relief)
MS MANIKA BATRA ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Sachin Datta, Sr. Adv with Mr.
Akshay Amritanshu, Adv
versus
TABLE TENNIS FEDERATION OF INDIA THROUGH THE
PRESIDENT & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Rishikesh Baruah, Sr. Adv. with
Ms. Tannu and Mr. Ajay Jain, Advs. for respondent
no.1.
Mr. Chetan Sharma, ASG with Mr. Apoorv Kurup,
CGSC and Ms. Akshata Singh, Adv. for respondent
no. 2.
Mr. Sabyasachi Choudhury, Sr. Adv. with Mr.
Soumya Dutta and Mr. Tridib Bose, Advs. for
respondent no. 3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI
REKHA PALLI, J (ORAL)
1. The present petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been preferred by a renowned Table Tennis player, presently ranked at world number 56 in Women‟s Table Tennis, assailing the "Rules and Regulations for National Camp" issued by the respondent no.1/the Table Tennis Federation of India on 04.08.2021, which interalia mandate compulsory attendance of players at the National Signature Not Verified DigitallySigned By:GARIMA MADAN W.P.(C) 10590/2021 Page 1 of 14 Signing Date:24.09.2021 14:29:50 Coaching Camp organized by the said respondent, in order to be selected for international events.
2. At the outset it may be noted that though the petitioner has, by way of prayer (ii), sought a direction to the respondent no.1 to include her name in the contingent representing India at the upcoming 25 th ITFF
- Asian Table Tennis Championship, 2021 to be held from 28.09.2021 to 05.10.2021 at Doha; learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits on instructions that keeping in view the limited time left for the commencement of the aforesaid tournament, the petitioner now does not wish to participate therein and therefore, does not press prayer (ii) any further.
3. The petition is, therefore, now confined to seeking the following reliefs:
"(i) A Writ of Certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing the Rules and Regulations titled as "Rules and Regulations for National Camp" dated
04.08.2021 (Annexure P4, [Pg. 289]) issued by Respondent No. 1; and
(iii) A Writ of Mandamus or any other writ, order or direction thereby directing the Respondent No. 2 to enquire into the management of the Respondent No. 1; conduct of Respondent No. 3 and other officials of Respondent No. 1 as detailed in the present petition and the email of the Petitioner dated 14.08.2021 and the representation sent by the Petitioner to Respondent No.1 dated 17.09.2021 and Respondent No.2 dated 17.09.2021 under the supervision of this Hon'ble Court."
4. The respondent no.1/ the Table Tennis Federation of India, having been recognized by respondent no. 2/ Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports as a National Sports Federation (hereinafter referred to as Signature Not Verified DigitallySigned By:GARIMA MADAN W.P.(C) 10590/2021 Page 2 of 14 Signing Date:24.09.2021 14:29:50 "NSF") for the sport of Table Tennis, has the duty to select the national team to represent India in all major international tournaments held under the aegis of International Table Tennis Federation, International Olympic Federation, Asian Table Tennis Union, as also to manage and regulate the national and inter-state Table Tennis Championships and to maintain a list of annual rankings of the players.
5. The respondent no.2, apart from laying down the framework for functioning of NSFs such as the respondent no.1, also has the right to suspend or withdraw the recognition of a NSF in the event of irregularities being detected in their functioning, in accordance with the National Sports Development Code of India, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as "Sports Code, 2011")
6. The petitioner has successfully represented India in various tournaments internationally since 2008 and has won several laurels for the country, and in recognition thereof, she was awarded the Major Dhyan Chand Khel Ratna Award i.e. India‟s highest sporting honour, in 2020. It is the petitioner‟s case that from 2018, since the quality of her training at Delhi was not satisfactory, her performance started suffering and therefore, she began training under the tutelage of a personal coach and support staff at a training institute, duly accredited by respondent no.2, situated in Pune. Consequently, there was a marked improvement in her performance, and she became the highest ranked female Indian player in the world rankings ever since.
7. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that while preparing to participate in the Olympic Games, 2020 held at Tokyo, the petitioner started facing pressure at the behest of respondent no.3, such as being coerced into signing a letter in February 2020 for Signature Not Verified DigitallySigned By:GARIMA MADAN W.P.(C) 10590/2021 Page 3 of 14 Signing Date:24.09.2021 14:29:50 recommending his name for the position of national coach. Thereafter, during the qualifying rounds, the respondent no.3, who has been appointed as the national coach by respondent no.1, had approached the petitioner on 17.03.2021, in respect of a match to be held on 18.03.2021 at the Asian Olympic Qualification Tournament, 2021, asking her to concede a match in order to enable a player who was undergoing personal coaching at the private institute being run by him, to qualify for the Olympics instead. He states that the petitioner not only refused to comply with the said request, but on 18.03.2021 itself, promptly brought the said incident of attempted match-fixing to the attention of the Advisor of respondent no.1, for which purpose, he relies upon the screenshots of the WhatsApp conversation between the petitioner and the Advisor of the respondent no.1. However, no action was taken by respondent no.1 in respect of this incident and soon thereafter, the petitioner was selected to represent India for the Olympic Games, 2020 held at Tokyo.
8. Keeping in view the incident of 17.03.2021, the petitioner had requested that instead of respondent no.3 being allowed to be her official coach at the Olympics; Mr. Sanmay Paranjape, under whom the petitioner had been training at Pune, be added in the category of „personal coaches‟ for the Olympics, which request was acceded to, even though the respondent no.1 created last-minute obstacles in the process by not sending Mr. Paranjape‟s passport to the Indian Olympic Association. During her first match itself, the petitioner indicated that she would be insecure in the presence of respondent no.3 in the arena as her coach and therefore, she was expecting that her personal coach and support staff (physiotherapist) would be allowed to be at the venue, but Signature Not Verified DigitallySigned By:GARIMA MADAN W.P.(C) 10590/2021 Page 4 of 14 Signing Date:24.09.2021 14:29:50 to her dismay, neither her personal coach nor her support staff were granted access to the arena and as a result, the petitioner played all the three rounds in the „single‟ category without the presence of any coach.
9. He submits that after returning from the Olympics, the petitioner, through newspaper reports, learnt about respondent no.1‟s proposal to issue a Show Cause Notice for initiating disciplinary action against her and consequently, she made a detailed representation to respondent no.1 on 14.08.2021, reiterating the allegations earlier made against respondent no.3, with a hope that the officials of respondent no.1 will examine the petitioner‟s complaint impartially. However, she was shocked to receive a Show Cause Notice from the respondent no.1 on 20.08.2021, wherein the said respondent, while denying the pointed allegations made by the petitioner, stated therein that her conduct of refusing to allow respondent no.3, i.e. the national team coach appointed by respondent no.1, to accompany her inside the field of play was not only a sign of disrespect to the coach but also brought disrepute to the nation and asked her to submit a reply as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against her.
10. The petitioner, thereafter, submitted her reply on 26.08.2021, once again reiterating the contents of her representation dated 14.08.2021 including the match-fixing pressure tactics adopted by respondent no.3. Immediately after the petitioner submitted her reply, the respondent no.1, on 27.08.2021, sent a communication to the petitioner and other selected players, informing them about the impugned rules and regulations framed by it, making it mandatory for players to attend the National Camp "from day 1 till the end of the Camp" in order to be eligible for selection in upcoming international Signature Not Verified DigitallySigned By:GARIMA MADAN W.P.(C) 10590/2021 Page 5 of 14 Signing Date:24.09.2021 14:29:50 events. Soon thereafter, i.e., within three days, the respondent no.1 issued another communication to the petitioner on 30.08.2021 directing her to attend the National Camp held by the said respondent at a local school in Sonepat from 02.09.2021 to 18.09.2021.
11. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner was already undergoing training with her personal coach at the training institute in Pune, and also had a reasonable apprehension that as the respondent no.3 was bound to be present at the National Camp in Sonepat, she would not be fairly treated at the said Camp; the petitioner responded to the communication issued by the respondent no.1 on 30.08.2021 directing her to attend the National Camp in Sonepat, by requesting the said respondent to permit her to continue training at Pune owing to the paucity of time in the commencement of the tournament. He submits that keeping in view the issue already raised by the petitioner in her representation dated 14.08.2021, as also the fact that she was undergoing training at an accredited institute for the last many months, the petitioner was hopeful that the respondent no.1 would accept her request to continue training at Pune, but to her surprise, the said respondent rejected her request on 31.08.2021 by relying on the impugned rules and on 06.09.2021, once again, asked her to join the National Camp at Sonepat in accordance with the impugned Rules and Regulations for National Camp.
12. He submits that by virtue of the impugned rules which mandate attendance at the National Camp as a pre-requisite for selection for international events, the petitioner‟s chance to participate in the Asian Table Tennis Championship, 2021 has been scuttled, despite her fulfilling all merit-based criterion. Moreover, the impugned rules also Signature Not Verified DigitallySigned By:GARIMA MADAN W.P.(C) 10590/2021 Page 6 of 14 Signing Date:24.09.2021 14:29:50 fail to consider that keeping in view the individual-based nature of the sport of table tennis, there is no obstacle or disadvantage caused to the players who choose to train with their personal support staff, without attending national or team camps, which is also an internationally accepted practice followed by players in similar individual sports such as badminton and tennis. He also submits that the players would benefit more from practicing with their sparring partner and support staff, since the requirement of every sportsperson is different and may not be met at National Camps of the nature held by the respondent no.1, and that too under the tutelage of support staff, which is appointed for the entire team, and does not have knowledge of the different strengths, weaknesses, skills of each individual player.
13. Mr. Datta submits that not only have the impugned rules been framed without any consultation with the table-tennis players, who are the primary stakeholders in the process, the rules have also been issued with a mischievous intent to harm the interests of the petitioner on account of her decision to not play with the respondent no.3 sitting as her coach during the Olympic Games, 2020. He further submits that, even otherwise, the impugned rules are being applied arbitrarily and selectively to players, for which purpose, he refers to the attendance-list of the National Camp held at Sonepat between 02.09.2021 and 18.09.2021, to contend that only some of the players had attended the said Camp "from day 1 till the end" as required by the impugned rules. He, thus, contends that despite this position, only the petitioner has been excluded from participating in international events.
14. He further submits that the respondent no.1, instead of investigating the serious allegations made by the petitioner through an Signature Not Verified DigitallySigned By:GARIMA MADAN W.P.(C) 10590/2021 Page 7 of 14 Signing Date:24.09.2021 14:29:50 impartial committee, had sought to appoint a five-member committee, which was a deliberate attempt to dismiss the petitioner‟s complaint as had been already projected by the respondent no.1 itself in its Show Cause Notice dated 20.08.2021. He, therefore, prays that the operation of the impugned rules be stayed, and the respondent no.2 be directed to hold an impartial inquiry into the allegations made by the petitioner against respondent no.3 vide her representation dated 14.08.2021 expeditiously, or in the alternative, this Court to constitute an independent committee to examine the petitioner‟s complaint.
15. Issue notice. Mr. Ajay Jain, Mr. Apoorv Kurup and Mr. Soumya Dutta accept notice on behalf of respondent nos. 1, 2 & 3, respectively. While granting two weeks‟ time to the respondents to file their counter affidavits, and one week‟s time to the petitioner to file a rejoinder thereto, the learned counsel for the parties have been heard at length on the aspect of interim relief.
16. The learned ASG, who appears on behalf of respondent no.2, supports the claim of the petitioner and in fact, contends that the impugned rules are in the teeth of the National Sports Code, 2011 as it enjoins all NSFs, including respondent no.1, to make a judicious selection of players for participation in major international events based on merit and not merely on the basis of attending National Camps organized by them. Moreover, there is nothing in the Sports Code, 2011 that mandates the respondent no.1 to frame such rules for individual- based sports where the comfort, convenience, and preference of the individual player is paramount. He, therefore, contends that when merit should be the only criteria for selection of candidates, the respondent no.1‟s stand of mandatorily requiring players to attend a National Camp Signature Not Verified DigitallySigned By:GARIMA MADAN W.P.(C) 10590/2021 Page 8 of 14 Signing Date:24.09.2021 14:29:50 organized under the aegis of the said respondent, failing which, they will be excluded from selection for future international tournaments, would clearly defeat merit as a criterion, and has to be discouraged. He further assures the Court that the respondent no.2 would expeditiously initiate an independent inquiry into the complaint of the petitioner, which was received by the said respondent only on 17.09.2021.
17. On the other hand, Mr. Baruah, who appears on behalf of respondent no.1, has sought to not only justify the framing of the impugned rules but has also sought to convey that the respondent no.1 is acting impartially and has now, on 21.09.2021, replaced the five- member committee constituted earlier to look into the petitioner‟s representation, by a three-member committee, which comprises of two independent members, besides the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the respondent no.1.
18. In support of his plea that the impugned rules have been framed with an intent to promote merit, Mr. Baruah submits that similar rules have already been framed by various NSFs including the Athletics Federation of India, Archery Association of India, Judo Federation of India and Indian Weightlifting Federation, which have stood the test of time. He contends that the respondent no.1 is only trying to promote merit and select the best sportspersons for international events, and it is only with this objective in mind that the impugned rules have been framed so that all players are given sufficient exposure and training, as may be recommended from time to time.
19. By placing reliance on a decision of a coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.(C) 8801/2018 titled Monika Chaudhary vs. Union of India and Ors., he contends that once the petitioner consciously did not Signature Not Verified DigitallySigned By:GARIMA MADAN W.P.(C) 10590/2021 Page 9 of 14 Signing Date:24.09.2021 14:29:50 participate in the National Camp, despite being informed promptly by the respondent no.1 that her request for exemption had been rejected, cannot now complain that she has been wrongly excluded from the forthcoming tournament. He further submits that even otherwise, once the petitioner was aware that the respondent no.3, against whom the petitioner had raised a grievance, was not nominated as a coach in the National Camp, Sonepat, there was no reason as to why the petitioner, as a disciplined sportsperson, ought not to have attended the said camp. He, therefore, submits that there is no reason for this Court to interfere with the impugned rules, which are based on the decision taken by the executive committee of respondent no.1 on 04.08.2021. He further submits that now that an inquiry committee has been constituted by the said respondent to look into the petitioner‟s complaint against respondent no.3, both the petitioner and respondent no.2 ought to wait for the report of the said committee.
20. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, I am constrained to express my anguish at the timing and the manner in which the impugned rules have been framed by the respondent no.1 based on the decision taken by its executive committee on 04.08.2021, as also the manner in which the constitution of the inquiry committee has been changed by it on 21.09.2021, immediately after the matter was heard by this Court on 20.09.2021, on which date, this Court had granted time to respondent no.2 to respond as to why it was not taking any appropriate steps to hold an inquiry into the complaint made by the petitioner.
21. The only justification provided by respondent no.1 for framing of the impugned rules is that similar rules have been framed by other Signature Not Verified DigitallySigned By:GARIMA MADAN W.P.(C) 10590/2021 Page 10 of 14 Signing Date:24.09.2021 14:29:50 NSFs including Athletics Federation of India, Archery Association of India, Judo Federation of India and Indian Weightlifting Federation. Besides the fact that none of these sports are akin to table tennis, where there is a requirement of a sparring partner for the player and therefore, it should normally be open for the player to practice either independently, or as a contingent, in order to achieve excellence in performance; it is an admitted position that none of these federations had framed such rules, at a point of time when there was a complaint already pending against the national coach. The decision in W.P.(C) 8801/2018 titled Monika Chaudhary vs. Union of India and Ors, on which heavy reliance has been placed by Mr. Barauh, will not apply to the facts of the present case, as in the said decision, the Court was not examining the validity of the rules, which in any event, pertained to a very different nature of sport altogether. Moreover, in the said decision, no plea of the rules having been framed for mala-fide reasons was being considered by the Court.
22. There can be no doubt that the respondent no.1, in its capacity as a NSF, should have the right to select the best players so that the prestige of the country is enhanced in the field of sports; however, merely because it has such a right to make selections in terms of the Sports Code, 2011, it cannot act in such an arbitrary manner. Not only have the impugned rules been framed at a point after the petitioner had already drawn the attention of the respondent no.1 to the pressure tactics being deployed by respondent no.3, but also at a time when the respondent no.1 was also well-aware of the reasons as to why the petitioner had declined the offer of respondent no.3 to sit as her coach during the Olympic Games, 2020. Moreso, the impugned rules were Signature Not Verified DigitallySigned By:GARIMA MADAN W.P.(C) 10590/2021 Page 11 of 14 Signing Date:24.09.2021 14:29:50 admittedly communicated to the players only on 27.08.2021 and were sought to be forcibly enforced within 3 days. Mr. Baruah's plea that the framing of the said rules was already in contemplation of the respondent no.1 for the last many months, does not inspire confidence at all as it is not disputed by the respondent no.1 that despite the petitioner training in Pune since March, 2019; she was selected for the Olympics, 2020 based entirely on merit, despite her having not attended some of camps and zonal tournaments organized at the time by the respondent no.1. Furthermore, the documents filed by the respondent no.1 itself show that despite there being a mandatory requirement in the impugned rules for all players to attend the camp from "day 1 till the end of the Camp" with a specific clause therein stating that "the players cannot take any umbrage under any prior commitment as the reason to skip the National Camp", most of the players attended the National Camp at Sonepat only for a few days, but have still been permitted to participate in the forthcoming tournaments.
23. Another factor which needs to be noted is that the respondent no.2 has itself taken the plea that the impugned rules are not in consonance with the Sports Code, 2011; by which, all NSFs, including respondent no.1 are bound. In view of the aforesaid, I am of the considered view that the petitioner has made out a prima facie case that if the operation of impugned rules is not stayed, it will not only cause irreparable prejudice and harm to the petitioner, but may also be detrimental to the larger public interest as it is likely to exclude meritorious sportspersons like the petitioner who have brought various laurels to the country from participating in forthcoming tournaments. Accordingly, till the next date, the operation of the impugned rules shall Signature Not Verified DigitallySigned By:GARIMA MADAN W.P.(C) 10590/2021 Page 12 of 14 Signing Date:24.09.2021 14:29:50 remain stayed.
24. Insofar as the respondent no.1's plea that it is willing to hold an independent inquiry into the serious allegations made by the petitioner is concerned, the less said the better. Such an inquiry by respondent no.1, at this stage, cannot be permitted. As already observed herein above, the timing of the respondent no.1 in changing the composition of the inquiry committee, that too with its CEO still being a member of the revised committee; as also the stake which the respondent no.2 has in promoting meritorious sportspersons, compels me to accept the respondent no. 2's offer to hold an impartial independent inquiry at the earliest. In the light of the fair stand taken by respondent no.2, despite the petitioner's fervent plea, this Court does not deem it necessary to appoint any independent committee to inquire into the petitioner's complaint, at this stage.
25. The respondent no.2 is, however, directed to proceed to get the petitioner's complaint examined by an appropriate committee within four weeks. Needless to state, the committee to be constituted by respondent no.2 will follow principles of natural justice and afford an opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties, including the petitioner and respondent no.3. While conducting the inquiry, the respondent no.2 will also consider whether any further scrutiny of the affairs of the respondent no.1 is warranted. A copy of the report of the committee will be placed before the Court on the next date.
26. At this stage, Mr. Baruah submits that though the petitioner has sought to blame the respondent no.1 for her personal coach and physiotherapist not being present at the match venue in the Olympics, 2020; the said respondent had never objected to their presence at the Signature Not Verified DigitallySigned By:GARIMA MADAN W.P.(C) 10590/2021 Page 13 of 14 Signing Date:24.09.2021 14:29:50 venue. He assures the Court that even in the future, in case the petitioner is permitted by respondent no.2 to take her personal coach and support staff to any international tournaments, the respondent no. 1 will not raise any objections in this regard. The said statement is taken on record.
27. List on 28.10.2021.
(REKHA PALLI) JUDGE SEPTEMBER 23, 2021/acm Signature Not Verified DigitallySigned By:GARIMA MADAN W.P.(C) 10590/2021 Page 14 of 14 Signing Date:24.09.2021 14:29:50