Devang V. Metha., v. The Directorate Of Sports And Youth Affairs, Thr. Its Director And 2 ORS.,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

PIL WRIT PETITION NO. 39 OF 2019 Devang V. Metha ... Petitioner V e r s u s The Directorate of Sports & Youth Affairs, through its Director & 2 Ors.

... Respondents Mr. Bhargav Khandeparkar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Ms. Sapna Mordekar, Additional Government Advocate for the Respondent nos.1 and 2.

Coram :- M. S. SONAK & C. V. BHADANG, JJ.

Date :

th November, 2019.

ORAL ORDER 1.

Heard Mr. Khandeparkar, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Mordekar, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondent nos.1 and 2. Respondent no.3 is served.

2.

The main grievance of the petitioner in this petition was the alleged unauthorised private coaching undertaken by the respondent no.3 at the Chicalim Sports Complex. 3.

The record now indicates that this grievance no longer survives since the permission granted to respondent no.3 stands revoked. Circumstances in which the permission was grated has been explained by the Deputy Director (Sports) Government of Goa in his affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent no.1. 4.

Besides, at paragraph 10 of the said affidavit, this is what is stated in relation to such coaching at various sports complexes in the State of Goa :

"10. With respect to para 17 of the petition, I say that there is a shortage of coaches that are appointed for badminton training and hence the respondent could not appoint a regular/full time coach for training students in the said complex. I say that for the State of Goa, there are two designated coach to train the students in badminton. I say that the respondent has

appointed one coach for North Goa and one coach for South Goa. I say that the coach appointed for North Goa used to conduct coaching for 3 days in a week in Panaji and 3 days at Peddem Mapusa. However, due to the ongoing renovation work at Campal Stadium the said Coach presently conducts training in Mapusa only. I say that the issue in Chicalim probably arose as the respondent did not have a coach appointed for Vasco Da Gama and the surrounding areas. I say that in order to avoid any such situation in the near future the respondent no.3 has with the prior approval of the SAG, vide its order dated 27.8.2019 directed the coach conducting training at Multi purpose hall Fatorda, Margao to conduct coaching at Vasco for 3 days in a week and for 3 days in Margao until such time as a regular coach is not appointed for Vasco Da Gama. Hereto annexed and marked as EXHIBIT "R-2" is the copy of the said order dated 27.8.2019.

"

5.

According to us, the grievance raised in the petition stands substantially redressed in the light of what is set out in the affidavit.

6.

Mr. Khandeparkar, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, however points out that the petitioner has offered certain suggestions which are listed up in paragraph 17 of the affidavit in rejoinder filed on 09.10.2019.

7.

Accordingly, we grant liberty to the petitioner to make a representation to respondent nos.1 and 2 including therein, inter alia, the suggestions made by him. Such representation, if made, to be considered and disposed off by the concerned authorities as expeditiously as possible in any case within a period of six months from the date of the receipt of the same. Necessary decision to be communicated to the petitioner.

8.

Petition is disposed off in the aforesaid terms. C. V. BHADANG, J.

M. S. SONAK, J.

arp/*