The Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal and a writ petition challenging earlier directions on the governance and elections of the Delhi Capital Badminton Association (DCBA), while issuing strong remarks on widespread violations of the National Sports Development Code. A Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetrapal and Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar upheld the findings of Court-appointed Administrator Justice (Retd.) Pankaj Naqvi, who reported that none of the 11 district badminton associations in Delhi are compliant with mandatory legal requirements.
According to the Administrator’s report, several district units were granted affiliation even before the DCBA legally came into existence; many lacked audited financial statements; some routed tournament funds through personal bank accounts; and multiple executive committee members had exceeded their permissible age and tenure limits. The Court held that the 2017 and 2023 DCBA elections were unverifiable and could not stand, as there were no proper electoral rolls, independent supervision, or official notifications, and thus no lawful electoral college existed from which a representative DCBA executive could emerge.
The Court found that the purported affiliation of district units prior to DCBA’s own registration and its affiliation with BAI was a substantive illegality that struck at the root of institutional legitimacy.
Observing that compliance with the Sports Code is “not a matter of choice,” the Bench directed a complete overhaul of the DCBA’s governance structure. The Court upheld the the Single Judge’s approach but went further by accepting in full the Administrator’s conclusions on structural, procedural, financial, and constitutional deficiencies in DCBA and its district units. The Administrator has been instructed to verify and regularise district units; grant affiliation only to compliant associations; prepare a lawful electoral college, and conduct fresh elections.
The Court directed that Justice (Retd.) Pankaj Naqvi, as Administrator, must within four months: (i) scrutinize all district units, (ii) verify and, where appropriate, regularize or grant affiliation in accordance with the Sports Code, (iii) finalize a lawful electoral college, and (iv) conduct fresh elections to the DCBA Executive Committee in a fair, transparent and code-compliant manner. It mandated proper accounts and annual audits by a registered chartered accountant and emphasized that the DCBA must be realigned with the core objectives of transparency, accountability, gender equity, and athlete-centric governance.
Dismissing the appeal and connected petition, the Court underscored that sports bodies must prioritise players, transparency, and lawful administration rather than internal factionalism.
Cases Relied on:
1. Rahul Mehra v. Union of India & Ors., 2022 SCC OnLine Del 2438
Appearances:
For the Appellant: Mr. Talha Abdul Rahman, Ms. Aakanksha Sinh and Mr. M. Shaz Khan, Advs.
For the Respondents: Mr. Bharat Gupta, Ms. Swapnil Shukla, and Mr. Amit Gupta, Advs. for R-1.
Mr. Nalin Kohli, Sr. Adv. along with Mr. Anshul Malik and Mr. Ayuushman Arora, Advs.
Mr. Ruchir Mishra, Mr. Mukesh Kumar Tiwari and Ms. Reba Jena Mishra, Advs.
Mr. Jai Anant Dehadrai, Ms. Srutee Priyadarshini, and Ms. Bhavya Jain, Advs. for R-6.
Ajeet Pandey v. Union of India, W.P.(C) 16967/2024 and CM APPL. 71863/2024
For the Petitioners: Mr. Tishampati Sen, Ms. Riddhi Sancheti, Mr. Anurag Anand and Mr. Mukul Kulhari, Advs.
For the Respondents: Mr. Ripudaman Bhardwaj CGSC along with Mr. Kushagra Kumar, Adv. for UOI.
Mr. Bharat Gupta, Ms. Swapnil Shukla, and Mr. Amit Gupta, Advs.
Mr. Nalin Kohli, Sr. Adv. along with Mr. Anshul Malik and Mr. Ayuushman Arora, Advs.
Mr. Jai Anant Dehadrai, Ms. Srutee Priyadarshini, and Ms. Bhavya Jain, Advs. for R-4 to 13
