Dismissed

Ct/Gd Aarti Sharma v. Union of India and Ors.

Delhi HC21 Jul 2026W.P.(C)/7398/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRPF sportswoman and Judo coach challenged signals de-inducting her from the Central Judo Team following an Annual Performance Review, alleging arbitrariness and gender discrimination. The respondents produced a speaking order citing age bar, indiscipline and Board recommendations. The Court held it would not substitute its view for that of the expert Board and found no gross illegality.

What the court decided

AI extract

Ct/Gd Aarti Sharma Vs Union of India and Ors. — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2026)

¶1

$~48

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 7398/2024, CM APPL. 32551/2024 & CM APPL. 681/2025

¶4

CT/GD AARTI SHARMA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ajit Kakkar, Mr. Tejas Bhonge, Ms. Shruti Singh, Ms. Jasmine Kinra and Ms. Manju, Advocates

¶5

versus

¶6

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Ankit Raj, Standing Counsel, Mr. Saurabh Mishra and Mr. Nikhil Kumar, Advocates for R-1. Mr. Vinod Sawant (Law Officer), Inspector Athurv, CRPF, Mr. M. Shekhar, CRPF.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

¶9

O R D E R % 21.07.2026

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the respective learned counsels for the respondents.

¶11

The prayer in the present petition is for setting aside the signals dated 24^th January, 2024, 20^th March, 2024 and 2^nd May, 2024 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the impugned signals’) .

¶12

Vide the aforesaid signals, the petitioner, in the matter of Annual Performance Review of a Sportsperson, was informed that the Board of Officers, constituted to review the sports performance of the Central Sports Team, had granted approval for de-induction and de-attachment of the petitioner. The petitioner was initially inducted as a sports woman in the Judo team.

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

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 23/07/2026 at 12:21:27

¶15

Vide the signal dated 20^th March, 2024, which is also regarding Annual Performance Review, the petitioner was informed to have been retained as a Coach in the said event but appears to have been discontinued from the concerned team. Similarly, vide another signal dated 2^nd May, 2024 the petitioner was detached from the said sports event.

¶16

The submissions on behalf of the petitioner are that having regard to her meritorious performance, she was initially recruited with the respondent on 30^th April, 2005 and on 12^th February, 2023, was further appointed as fulltime Coach of the Men’s Judo Team vide signal dated 12^th May, 2023. 6. It is the case of the petitioner that Mr. Akram Shah, serving on the post of Deputy Commandant, threatened her that she would be removed from the position of Coach. 7. Vide signals referred above, which are impugned herein, the petitioner was deprived not only from the postion of player but also as Coach. The aforesaid signals were issued pursuant to the Board of Officers constituted to review the performance of the players and coaches.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been an extremely competent, meritorious and brilliant athlete and based on her such meritorious background, she was enrolled with the respondent under the sports quota. According to him, under her aegis, not only in various sports events in the Judo game, the performances were appreciated but also medals were awarded. He would claim that the petitioner was discharged of the aforesaid responsibilities, viz ., the sportswoman representing the interest of respondent as Chief Coach contrary to the established guidelines.

¶18

He would claim that though a discretion is vested in the respondent to continue the petitioner in the sports event beyond the qualified age, still the

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

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 23/07/2026 at 12:21:27

¶21

fact remains that the performance has to be assessed irrespective of age factor and the fact that the petitioner lastly performed well sufficiently establish that she should be continued not only as sportswoman representing the interest of the respondent but also on the post of Coach.

¶22

As against above, the counsel for the respondent states that in view of the directions of this Court, a speaking order came to be passed by the respondent thereby, intimating the reasons as to why the petitioner was discontinued from the post in question.

¶23

According to him, there are sufficient reasons to discontinue the petitioner from the post, not only because she has an age bar, but it was noticed by the board that her performance, in view of advancing of age, has been reduced.

¶24

It is further urged that the decision of the respondent is not open for judicial review, particularly, having regard to the assessment by the board consisting of expert persons, the dismissal is sought.

¶25

Having considered the rival submissions, the respondent has communicated the petitioner the reasons which reads as under:-

¶26

“05. The Petitioner was de-inducted due to the following grounds:

¶27

i. No. 051010028 HC/GD (Mah) Aarti Sharma of 135 (M) Bn while in Central Judo Team submitted a complaint against Shri Akram Shah, Dy. Manager, CJT (Men) regarding mental harassment and unnecessary interference in coaching and on enquiring the matter by a Gazetted Officer, no Prima facie evidence was found and the allegation found baseless.

¶28

ii. The Training Directorate was receiving complaints against her at regular intervals regarding her participation in the World Police & Fire Games held abroad without taking prior approval of competent

¶29

This is a digitally signed order.

¶30

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 23/07/2026 at 12:21:27

¶31

authority, which is a serious misconduct for Govt. employees, the unauthorized claim of Honorarium amounting to Rs. 3 lakhs from the Central Sports Fund for non-authorized tournament i.e., Masters Commonwealth Championship 2018, interference in the domain of Manager Judo Team to name a few.

¶32

iii. In the year 2021, a "WARNING" letter was issued to her by the DIG (CSO) vide office letter No. M.V-1/2021-PA (Sports) dated 02/11/2021 for her indiscipline.

¶33

iv. About her complaint of gender discrimination, fact is that she was attached to the Central Judo Team, GC CRPF, New Delhi w.e.f. 03/05/2005 and spent more than 19 years within the team at the same place as a player. During this long period, she never came up with grievances of gender discrimination, but as soon as she was de-inducted from the team, she tried to establish that her de- attachment from the position of Chief Coach was arbitrary and rooted in gender discrimination & a baseless series of other allegations. It is worth mentioning that, she alone was not de-inducted, but 24 persons including the petitioner were de-inducted, which includes male and female players based on the recommendation of the board so constituted.”

¶34

The fact remains that there were certain complaints made by the petitioner against a Deputy Manager, and the same was looked into, which was found to be not having any substance. Furthermore, there are other reasons which are furnished by the respondent with respect to the discontinuation of the petitioner.

¶35

Paragraph 6 of the speaking order speaks of de-induction of the petitioner was taken by the competent authority based on the recommendations of the Board of Officers after assessing all aspects as per the sports policy for induction and de-induction. The same reads as under:-

¶36

“06. During hearing of the Petitioner in person by the Competent Authority on 16.07.2024 in pursuance to the Hon'ble Court of Delhi interim order dated 03/06/2024, the petitioner has neither brought out any new facts nor produced any documents to substantiate any injustice caused to her. Hence, the Competent Authority is not inclined to re-

¶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 23/07/2026 at 12:21:27

¶39

induct the Petitioner into the Central Judo Team due to the following reasons:

¶40

i. Decision on "de-induction" of the Petitioner was taken by the competent authority based on the recommendation of the Board of Officers after assessing all aspects as per the Sports Policy for Induction and De-Induction.

¶41

ii. All sports events held abroad cannot be treated as international events. Rather, for those organizational purposes, the events as specified by DoPT are treated as International events. The petitioner is claiming herself as a player of International stature. If the Petitioner won a medal in the Commonwealth Games, she would have been given out of turn promotion as per existing instruction issued by DoPT.

¶42

iii. Ordinarily, a sportsperson may continue in the sports team up to the upper age limit tabulated at Para-4 of existing Sports Policy 30/06/2021, wherein the maximum age limit of a sportsperson of Judo discipline is 40 years. Since she exceeded the maximum age limit, she was deinducted from the team as a player in January 2024, but retained as a Coach. However, she was de-inducted from the Central Judo Team on 02/05/2024 considering her indiscipline by the Board during reviewing her case. But she has tried to give it a different colour with the motto of staying in New Delhi, though she is duty bound to serve anywhere in India or even abroad.

¶43

iv. Based on past performance, one cannot be retained in the team for life long. Besides, as per para 6 of Sports policy of CRPF, discipline is of paramount importance in the Force and hence every sportsperson is supposed to maintain the discipline of high order. Considering all these the Board has reviewed her case and decided to de-induct from the team. Furthermore, the CRPF Act & Rule grounds is equally applicable to the sports team. Besides, it is the prerogative of the Department to induct Managers/Coaches to the team(s).

¶44

v. She was appointed to CRPF under Sports Quota and played for CRPF. She was appointed as a player but not found suitable and hence deinducted. Appointments as Manager/Coach in the Sports Team are not substantive positions but are utility-based.

¶45

This is a digitally signed order.

¶46

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 23/07/2026 at 12:21:27

¶47

vi. If gender based discrimination prevailed in the team as she claims, she would not have been detailed as coach of the judo (Men) team. Hence, her allegation(s) of gender based discrimination against the Respondent(s) is without any valid grounds. CRPF do have many female Managers for both men's and women's team.

¶48

vii. To maintain a young, energetic, efficient, disciplined and medalwinning Central Team,”

¶49

It is borne out of the record that the petitioner has crossed the age limit, which is prescribed to continue as a sportswoman representing the interest of the respondent.

¶50

In our opinion, the discretion in such an eventuality is vesting with the respondent and the board, consisting of expert officers, to assess the performance of the petitioner.

¶51

The Board which consists of expert officers having assessed the performance of the petitioner, there is no reason as to why this Court in its extraordinary jurisdiction, should substitute the views to that of the views expressed by the Board.

¶52

Apart from the above, no gross illegality or irregularity could be noticed, which warrants, not only to entertain the petition but also cause indulgence of extraordinary jurisdiction.

¶53

In our opinion, the petition lacks merit and stands dismissed. 21. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

¶54

NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE, J

¶55

AMIT SHARMA, J

¶56

JULY 21, 2026 /sn/ah

¶57

This is a digitally signed order.

¶58

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 23/07/2026 at 12:21:27

Ct/Gd Aarti Sharma v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Ct/Gd Aarti Sharma v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satya Prakash Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Ors.

Namita Gupta Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Ritu Dhingra Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

M/S B.M. Water Meters Vs Delhi Jal Board & Anr.

Sadhu Vaswani International School for Girls Vs Directorate of Education

Mahinder Narang & Anr. Vs Gurpreet Kaur Nanda & Ors.

Kamal Prakash Yadav Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Kunwar Pal Vs Servel India Pvt. Ltd.

Amith Pal Vs Union of India & Ors.

Aryan Yadav Vs Union of India & Ors.

Shamsher Singh & Ors. Vs Union of India & Anr.

Pappu Mondal Vs Union of India and Ors.

Komal Vs Union of India and Ors.

Amit Kumar Vs Union of India & Ors.