The Delhi High Court has held that a national sports federation, such as the Indian Olympic Association (IOA), is bound by the objective eligibility and qualification framework prescribed by the governing international federation (FIS) and cannot unilaterally introduce additional mandatory conditions for selection. The Court reasoned that there is a clear distinction between ‘quota allocation’ for a country and ‘athlete eligibility’, and conflating the two constitutes a fundamental misreading of the qualification system.
The Court pointed out that the eligibility of an athlete is determined by the criteria set out in Section C of the FIS Qualification System, which is based on objective FIS points, and nowhere is ‘participation in the World Championship’ mandated as a condition. Therefore, disregarding the most meritorious athlete based on an unstated and retrospectively applied criterion that is not part of the official binding rules, is manifestly arbitrary and illegal, warranting the Court’s intervention to protect the fundamental rights of the athlete.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh observed that the selection process was manifestly arbitrary and unfair and that the IOA and its Ad-hoc Committee (Respondent Nos. 1 and 2) had failed in their duty. Consequently, the Bench directed the respondents to forthwith include the petitioner in the list of athletes representing India at the Winter Olympic Games, Milano Cortina 2026, and declare his exclusion illegal and arbitrary.
The Bench also directed the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports (Respondent No. 3) to make all reasonable efforts to ensure the petitioner’s participation, with the full support and immediate action of Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. As far as the legality of the Ad-hoc Committee’s constitution is concerned, the Bench directed the respondents to file a detailed reply within four weeks and scheduled the matter for further hearing.
Briefly, the petitioner, an athlete specialising in Cross Country Skiing, filed a petition after being excluded from the Indian contingent for the Winter Olympic Games, Milano Cortina 2026. The petitioner claimed to be the most meritorious athlete, holding the first position in the official FIS ranking list for the 2025-2026 assessment period.
The selection was conducted by an Ad-hoc Committee constituted by the Indian Olympic Association (IOA), which the petitioner alleged was illegally formed and had a conflict of interest as two of its three members were active athletes. The Ad-hoc Committee selected another athlete, justifying the decision based on his performance in the March 2025 World Championships, an event the petitioner did not participate in.
The respondents, IOA and the Ad-hoc Committee, argued that participation in the World Championship was a mandatory requirement and that the petitioner was ineligible for selection as his name was not on the mandatory ‘Long List’.
Opposing the same, the petitioner contended that the selection should have been based on the objective FIS points criteria accumulated over the entire assessment period from 01.07.2024 to 18.01.2026, and that retrospectively applying the World Championship result as the sole determinant was arbitrary and contrary to the notified FIS Qualification System.
Appearances:
Advocate Neha Singh, for the Petitioner
Senior Advocate Gopal Jain, along with Advocates Aashits Khanna, Aanya Agarwal, Vidushpat Singhania, Ruchir Mishra, Mukesh K Tiwari, Shubhendu Kaushik GP, for the Respondent
