Churchill Brothers Sports Club Pvt. Ltd. v. Union Of India & ANR

$~47 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 11218/2016 CHURCHILL BROTHERS SPORTS CLUB PVT. LTD.

..... Petitioner Through Mr. Mohan Parasaran with Ms.

Gurveen Dhariwal and Mr. Ashwin Kumar, Advocates.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr. Arpit Shukla, Advocate for respondent No.1.

Mr. Saurabh Kirpal with Mr.

Premtosh Mishra, Ms. Yojna Goyal, Ms. Varsha Lakhani and Ms. Saloni Aggarwal, Advocates for respondent No.2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

O R D E R

% 28.11.2016 CM No.43910/2016 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions. W.P.(C) 11218/2016 The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to permit the petitioner to participate in the upcoming season of I-League 20162017 and 2017-2018. It is contended that the petitioner is a four decade old football club having a rich history with several titles to its credit. The petitioner was the Defending Champion of the Federation

Cup in 2013-14 and the also the winner of the I-League 2012-13 season.

It is contended that the petitioner club has a rich history and sporting talent. For the current season of the I-League, the petitioner has been ousted from participation. It is contended that the petitioner satisfies all the requisite criteria in the forthcoming I-League season. The petitioner applied for the grant of First Division Club Licence for the year 2014-15. There was litigation with regard to the said licence, however, subsequently, the said licence was not granted. The application for grant of licence for the season 2015-16 was not accepted since the petitioner had not participated in the I-league season 2014-15.

It is contended that, for the current season, once again, the petitioner was denied a licence. However, since a number of teams participating in the current season has reduced, the petitioner may be considered for being permitted to participate in the current I-league season.

The petitioner has made a representation to the respondent for being considered for participation in the current season. Issue notice.

Notice is accepted by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1 as also by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2.

The contention of the petitioner is that for the current season number of teams participating has reduced and there may be a vacancy/slots for further participation by the other teams who were not earlier permitted to participate and, further, since the contention of the petitioner is that it has a rich history and several titles to its credit,

the respondents may consider the representation of the petitioner keeping in view the track record and history of the petitioner Club. The respondents are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law and take a decision thereon within a period of two weeks. While considering the representation, the respondent No.2 shall take into account the track record and history of the petitioner Club. Needless to state, the petitioner shall be required to comply with the other terms and conditions as required by the respondent No.2.

It is further clarified that in case the petitioner is permitted to participate in the current season, the petitioner shall comply with all requisite terms and conditions inter alia also furnish the requisite undertaking for subsequent years.

It is further clarified that the present order has been passed in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. The writ petition is disposed of, in the above terms. Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master. SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J NOVEMBER 28, 2016 st