The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with the selection of India’s Dressage team for the 2026 Asian Games, holding that the Equestrian Federation of India (EFI) had adhered to its notified Selection Criteria and that courts cannot substitute the opinion of expert bodies in sports selection matters unless the decision-making process is shown to be arbitrary, capricious or perverse.
Justice Mini Pushkarna dismissed two writ petitions challenging the selection list issued on June 16, 2026, by the Ad-hoc Committee of the EFI for the Dressage discipline. The petitioners, who had been placed on the reserve list, sought inclusion in the final team for the Asian Games scheduled to be held in Japan from September 19 to October 4, 2026.
One of the petitioners contended that the EFI had incorrectly calculated the rider’s Minimum Eligibility Requirement (MER) by refusing to consider a Prix St. Georges (PSG) score secured at a competition in Hagen, Germany, instead of a score obtained in Belgium. The petitioner also alleged bias in the selection process. The second petitioner challenged the methodology adopted by the EFI, arguing that Team MERs ought to have been considered first for ranking riders before taking individual scores into account.
Rejecting the first challenge, the Court held that under the Selection Criteria, riders based abroad could combine scores from different competitions only where a particular event did not include all three mandatory Dressage tests—Prix St. Georges, Intermediate I and Intermediate I Freestyle. Since the Belgium competition in question included all three tests, the petitioner could not disregard one score from that event and substitute it with a higher score from another competition. The Court also found that the examples of other selected riders relied upon by the petitioner were distinguishable because, in those cases, scores had been combined only where the original competition lacked one or more mandatory tests, in accordance with the Selection Criteria.
On the second challenge, the Court held that the Selection Criteria expressly required riders to be ranked on the basis of the highest cumulative percentage scores across their two best valid MERs and made no distinction in the manner suggested by the petitioner. It observed that while Individual MERs were accorded higher merit over Team MERs, the comparative ranking had correctly been prepared on the basis of cumulative scores across the prescribed tests. The Court found the EFI’s interpretation to be consistent with the objective of ensuring complete competitive preparedness for the Asian Games.
The High Court also rejected the contention that the list issued by the EFI was merely provisional and that further inter se trials among the six shortlisted riders were mandatory before finalising the team. Accepting the federation’s explanation that the shortlisted riders were based across different parts of Europe, making further competitions impracticable, the Court held that the absence of additional trials did not vitiate the selection process. It noted that the Selection Committee and the Ad-hoc Executive Committee had independently evaluated the performances and MER achievements of all eligible horse-rider combinations before unanimously approving the final list.
Rejecting the allegation of bias, the Court held that the petitioner had acquiesced to the constitution of the Selection Committee and could not subsequently challenge its composition after participating in the selection process.
Observing that the selection process was “fair and in consonance with the Selection Criteria” and was neither irrational, arbitrary nor perverse, the Court reiterated that it is beyond the scope of judicial review to substitute its opinion for that of expert bodies in matters relating to the selection of athletes for international sporting events. Accordingly, the Court dismissed both writ petitions and upheld the EFI’s selection of the Indian Dressage team for the 2026 Asian Games
