Abdur Rahman Vs Sports Management Board & Ors.

This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of the impugned demand email dated 20.04.2023 issued by respondent No.3.

¶13

The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is an accomplished squash player who has won several tournaments and is presently representing the State of Bihar at the national level. For the purpose of regular practice and participation, the petitioner has been availing the ‘Pay and Play’ facility at the Squash and Badminton Stadium situated at Siri Fort Road, New Delhi, which is a public sports facility under the control and management of the Delhi Development Authority (respondent No. 2), constituted under the Delhi Development Act, 1957.

¶14

The Squash and Badminton Stadium at Siri Fort Road comprises 10 squash courts, including one glass court. The facility is open to the

¶15

This is a digitally signed order.

¶16

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/02/2026 at 12:28:10

¶17

general public on a strictly ‘Pay and Play’ basis, and no monthly or annual membership is required. As per the prevailing rates, the charges for playing squash are Rs. 100 per person for half an hour and Rs. 200 per person for one hour.

¶18

Separate private coaching charges are levied at the rate of Rs. 700 per session, in addition to the regular court usage charges. No person is permitted to use the facility without first paying the prescribed entry fee and obtaining a receipt from the counter at the entrance. The receipt is required to be shown to the guard, who records the details in the register and thereafter permits entry for the chosen sport. Post the Covid-19 pandemic, payments are accepted only through card, and no cash transactions are permitted at the counter.

¶19

In or around January - February 2023, an altercation took place between the Secretary of respondent No. 1 and a squash player who is a friend of the petitioner. As the petitioner supported his friend during the said incident, the Secretary advised the petitioner not to play for a few days.

¶20

Subsequently, on 04.02.2023, the petitioner was denied entry to the stadium and was not permitted to avail the ‘Pay and Play’ facility on the alleged ground of pending arrears. Thereafter, vide email dated 15.04.2023, the petitioner, without admitting any wrongdoing, tendered an apology for any alleged violation of rules, if any, committed by him.

¶21

Thereafter, only pursuant to the petitioner’s email dated 15.04.2023 seeking clarification, respondent No. 3 issued an email dated 20.04.2023 (“impugned Demand Email”), whereby an amount of Rs. 4,01,700/- was arbitrarily demanded from the petitioner. The said demand was raised under the alleged head of “Private Coaching Charges” for a period of approximately 15 months.

¶22

This is a digitally signed order.

¶23

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/02/2026 at 12:28:10

¶24

The impugned Demand Email further threatened the petitioner with permanent debarment from the stadium facility in case of non-payment of the said amount.

¶25

Hence, the present Petition.

¶26

Ms. Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, supports the impugned order.

¶27

At the outset, she states that prayer ‘b’ has been rendered infructuous, inasmuch as the petitioner has already been permitted to use the facility strictly in accordance with the applicable rates and charges. She clarifies that whenever the petitioner conducts coaching sessions, he pays the prescribed coaching charges, and whenever he uses the facility to play with friends/partners, he is charged only under the “pay and play” category, without any coaching fee being levied.

¶28

She further contends that in his email dated 15.04.2023, the petitioner has unequivocally admitted to having committed certain defaults and has tendered an apology for the same. According to her, this admission leads to the irresistible conclusion that all 577 sessions in question were coaching sessions, thereby rendering the petitioner liable to pay coaching charges for the entirety thereof.

¶29

She also invites attention to the email of the petitioner’s business partner, Mr. Amjad Ali Khan who had earlier been granted a coaching contract to substantiate the respondents’ stand.

¶30

I have heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the material on record.

¶31

In Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, Govt. of India v. Cricket Assn. of Bengal, (1995) 2 SCC 161 , it was held as under:

¶32

This is a digitally signed order.

¶33

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/02/2026 at 12:28:10

¶34

“75. It can hardly be denied that sport is an expression of self. In an athletic or individual event, the individual expresses himself through his individual feat. In a team event such as cricket, football, hockey etc., there is both individual and collective expression. It may be true that what is protected by Article 19(1)(a) is an expression of thought and feeling and not of the physical or intellectual prowess or skill.”

¶35

Keeping this in mind, this Court observes that sporting activities are not merely recreational engagements but play a vital role in fostering physical fitness, mental well-being and discipline. Regular participation in sports contributes to the overall health of individuals and promotes a balanced lifestyle. Access to sporting facilities, therefore, assumes significance, particularly in contemporary times when sedentary habits and lifestyle-related ailments are on the rise.

¶36

In the present case, the communications dated 15.04.2023 and 27.02.2023 are reproduced as under:-

¶37

This is a digitally signed order.

¶38

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/02/2026 at 12:28:10

¶39

This is a digitally signed order.

¶40

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/02/2026 at 12:28:10

¶41

This is a digitally signed order.

¶42

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/02/2026 at 12:28:10

¶43

This is a digitally signed order.

¶44

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/02/2026 at 12:28:10

¶45

A bare perusal of the aforesaid communications would demonstrate that at no point has the petitioner admitted to having imparted coaching in all 577 sessions during which he utilized the facility. Likewise, the email dated 27.02.2023 does not contain any such admission. In the absence of any categorical acknowledgment on the part of the petitioner, the respondents’ inference to the contrary is wholly misconceived and unsustainable.

¶46

Further, the impugned demand of ₹4,00,000/- has been raised without issuance of any Show Cause Notice and without affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. The action is thus in blatant violation of the principles of natural justice.

¶47

Additionally, the petitioner is a person of national repute and it would be in the fitness of things that he is permitted to impart skills to young kids, students of the game and people who are desirous of learning to play Squash.

¶48

Mr. Savla, learned senior counsel, states that the petitioner, in the spirit of the sport and as a sportsman, assures and undertakes that as and when he will give coaching, he will pay the coaching charges and wherever he goes to play with partner/ friends, he will pay the “pay and play charges”.

¶49

For the said reasons, the present petition is allowed and impugned demand email dated 20.04.2023 is hereby set aside.

¶50

The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶51

JASMEET SINGH, J

¶52

FEBRUARY 13, 2026 (MS)

¶53

This is a digitally signed order.

¶54

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 21/02/2026 at 12:28:10

Abdur Rahman v. Sports Management Board & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdur Rahman v. Sports Management Board & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gowhar Amin Shah Vs Union of India & Ors.

Jai Chand Vs Union of India and Ors.

Akil Ahmad & Anr. Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Inlead Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 30 Delhi & Ors.

Ms Economy Sales Vs New Delhi Municipal Council and Ors.

Harvinder Singh Sethi Vs Delhi Development Authority & Ors.

Rupali Khanna Vs Canara Bank & Ors.

M/S Creative Channel Advertising and Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Vs Prasar Bharti

Manjeet Vs Indian Olympic Association (Ioa) and Ors.

Sakshi Grover Vs Central Bank of India

Dashmesh Education Society Regd Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Mr Subhash Dabas Vs Axis Bank Limited & Anr.

Santosh Kohli Vs Delhi Development Authority

Mrs. Urmila Devi Vs Anand Rathi Insurance Brokers Ltd. & Ors.