SC declines Vidarbha Hockey Association’s plea for recognition

The counsel also alleged that other states, such as Delhi, had more than one associate member. Read further on Dynamite News:

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a plea filed by the Vidarbha Hockey Association seeking recognition as an associate member of Hockey India and the Indian Olympic Association (IOA), citing the Olympic charter’s stipulation that only one association per sport per state can be affiliated under IOA norms.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Dipankar Datta heard the matter and permitted the petitioner to withdraw the case after brief arguments. The court questioned the maintainability of the petition under its writ jurisdiction.

The petitioner had challenged the Bombay High Court’s earlier decision, which upheld Hockey India's move to revoke Vidarbha Hockey Association's associate membership. The petitioner contended that it had been arbitrarily removed from the membership rolls despite having held associate status since 2013.

The counsel also alleged that other states, such as Delhi, had more than one associate member.

However, Justice Datta noted from the case material that examples cited by the petitioner such as Cricket and Kabaddi bodies were non-Olympic sports and thus not bound by IOA’s stricter framework.

He further observed that both the Vidarbha Hockey Association and the Mumbai Hockey Association had been de-registered, as only one body from Maharashtra could be affiliated under IOA rules.

“What relief can a writ court grant in such a scenario?” asked Justice Kant, questioning how the Supreme Court could intervene in a matter governed by internal sports regulations.

The bench also expressed dissatisfaction with the urgency cited to list the matter during vacation sitting. “June 2024 order, you file the SLP in May 2025, what was the tearing urgency?” asked Justice Kant. “You people have forced us to sit a whole night to read,” he added.

Justice Datta further pointed to gaps in the petitioner’s case, highlighting the failure to file a rebuttal affidavit before the High Court. “Then that's the end of the matter,” the judge observed.

Following these remarks, the petitioner withdrew the case, bringing the legal challenge to an end for now.