Nandkishor Murlidhar Jivtode v. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Through The Establishment Officer, Mumbai And 2 Other

1603wp5561.15

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO. 5561 OF 2015 (Nandkishor Murlidhar Jivtode vs. Maharashtra State Road Trasnport Corporation thr. Establishment Officer & Ors.) AND WRIT PETITION NO. 5562 OF 2015 (Umesh Govindrao Kadukar vs. Maharashtra State Road Trasnport Corporation thr. Establishment Officer & Ors.) _____________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders.

and Registrar's Orders.

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & P.N. DESHMUKH, JJ.

MARCH 16, 2016.

Heard Shri Kalangiwale, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri Kedar and Shri Patil, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 & 2 in respective petitions and Mrs. Joshi, learned AGP for respondent No. 3.

The effort of Shri Kalangiwale, learned counsel, is to demonstrate that game of Ball Badminton is recognized by Indian Olympic Association and tournaments conducted are also recognized by it. He submits that therefore, non recognition by Maharashtra Olympic Association is not relevant. He further adds that omission of Maharashtra Olympic Association to recognize the game of Ball Badminton or tournaments, cannot be decisive. Shri Kedar and Shri Patil, learned counsel for MSRTC and Mrs. Joshi, learned AGP for respondent No. 3 - Directorate of Sports and Youth Services, Pune, point out that not only game needs to be recognized but tournaments also need to be approved and held by the Maharashtra

1603wp5561.15 Olympic Federation or then any other association affiliated with it.

Shri Kedar, learned counsel submits that if such a check is not maintained, anybody and everybody can hold tournaments at even National level and issue certificates. We have perused the prayer clauses in the petitions. The larger question sought to be raised by Shri Kalangiwale, learned counsel, does not specifically arise in these matters as the association which organizes the game is not the petitioner before this Court. There is no challenge to any Government Resolution in the present petitions. Hence, we find ourselves unable to grant any relief to the petitioners in present matters. However, considering the contentions raised, we grant the petitioners leave to file fresh petitions, raising necessary issues, in accordance with law.

Needless to mention that the objections of the respondents to such petitions and their contentions regarding it, are kept open.

Accordingly, with said liberty, we dispose of the present petitions. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

JUDGE JUDGE *GS.