The Delhi high court on Tuesday refused to stay the September 28 All India Tennis Association (AITA) elections even as it barred the publication of its results.
Tennis players Somdev Devvarman and Purav Raja challenged the elections saying the AITA was conducting them in violation of the National Sports Development Code, and court directions in matters about National Sports Federations. They argued that permitting AITA to conduct the polls without complying with the code would render their petition infructuous and cause grave prejudice.
Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav said elections require a lot of preparation. “If the election process is in defiance of the directions, then the office bearers will be restrained from functioning. Then we will consider appointing someone as the ad hoc…That election will be set aside. Let them [AITA] go on [with the polls]. Elections can always be set aside...,” Justice Kaurav told senior advocate Rahul Mehra, who appeared for Devvarman and Raja.
Mehra submitted the polls were being conducted in a “clandestine manner” as there was nothing about them on the AITA website.
Justice Kaurav said any election shall remain subject to the outcome of Devvarman and Raja’s petition. “Let the result of the election be placed...the result of the elections shall not be published.” He sought the Union sports ministry and AITA’s response and scheduled the next hearing for October 14.
The petitioners said the Union sports ministry directed the AITA to comply with the code without making efforts to ascertain if the association followed it. They accused the ministry of turning a blind eye to multiple violations. The petitioners sought the appointment of a retired Supreme Court or high court judge as an AITA administrator. Devvarman and Raja sought directions to AITA’s executive committee to hand all affairs, and books of accounts to the court-appointed administrator
{{/usCountry}}The petitioners said the Union sports ministry directed the AITA to comply with the code without making efforts to ascertain if the association followed it. They accused the ministry of turning a blind eye to multiple violations. The petitioners sought the appointment of a retired Supreme Court or high court judge as an AITA administrator. Devvarman and Raja sought directions to AITA’s executive committee to hand all affairs, and books of accounts to the court-appointed administrator
{{/usCountry}}Advocates R Arunadhri Iyer, Jhanvi Dubey, and Vaibhav Gulia argued Devvarman and Purav Raja’s plea.