Disposed

P.Gnanaprabhu v. The Union of India

Madras HC2 Sept 2021WP/4433/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition challenging favourable selection of overaged players for a national soft tennis tournament, the High Court disposed of the matter by permitting the petitioner to submit a representation to the Union Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports for a reasoned decision within twelve weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed without adjudication on merits; petitioner permitted to submit representation to Union Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports regarding the matter.

P.Gnanaprabhu Vs The Union of India — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 02.09.2021

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU

¶7

W.P.No.4433 of 2021

¶8

P.Gnanaprabhu

¶9

 ...Petitioner

¶10

Vs.

¶11

1. Union of India

¶12

 rep. by its Secretary to Sports

¶13

 Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports
 Room No.401, C Wing, Shastri Bhawan

¶14

 New Delhi.

¶15

2. The Member Secretary

¶16

Sports Development Authority of Tamil Nadu No.116-A, EVR Periyar High Road

¶17

 Nehru Park, Chennai – 600 084.

¶18

3. The District Collector Collector's Office Salem.

¶19

4. The Amateur Soft Tennis of India rep. by its Secretary General 818/33/1, Laxmipura, Near Ankur Mill Gitamandir Road, Ahmedabad – 380 022.

¶20

5. The Tamil Nadu Soft Tennis Association rep. by its Secretary, Sembannan 2/94, Geetha Nagar Salem Steel Plant Salem – 636 030.

¶21

6. The Tamil Nadu Soft Tennis Association rep. by its President, K.Arjunan M.G.Road, New Fairlands Salem – 636 016.

¶22

7. S.R.Abishek

¶23

8. V.S.Arun 9. S.Sujeeth 10.T.Hamrutha 11.K.Swetha ... Respondents

¶24

Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondents 1
to 4 herein to initiate action against the fifth respondent
association for the fraudulent activities being done in the
selection of candidates for Championships State, National and
International Championships for Soft Tennis.

¶25

`For the Petitioner`	`: Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan` `Senior Advocate` `for M/s.AL.Ganthimathi`
`For the Respondents`	`: Ms.N.K.Nithilavani, CGSC` `for 1`^st`respondent`
	`: Mr.Thamilpriyan` `for 2`^nd`respondent`
	`: Mr.P.Muthukumar` `State Government Pleader` `for 3`^rd`respondent`
	`: Mr.T.R.Rajagopalan` `Senior Advocate` `for Ms.P.Veena Suresh` `for 4`^th`respondent`
	`: Ms.K.Priya`
	`for respondents 5 and 6`
	`: No appearance` `for respondents 7 to 11`

¶26

ORDER

¶27

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶28

The matter pertains to certain participants sponsored by
the State or the relevant association of the State to
participate in the 13thSub-Junior National Soft Tennis
Championship.

¶29

2. The allegations made in the petition pertain to
certain players having been favoured on grounds of nepotism to
enable such players to undeservingly obtain certificates
pertaining to participation at a national-level meet despite
being overaged for the relevant tournament. The real dispute
pertains to the notification as to what should have been the age
of the players participating in the 13th Sub-Junior National Soft
Tennis Championship 2019-20. There are some murmurs that since
the 13th Sub-Junior National Soft Tennis Championship could not
be conducted as players from all States were selected and sent

¶30

to the 16th World Soft Tennis Championship at Taizhou, China, it
was subsequently decided that players who could not participate
in the tournament scheduled in November, 2019 would be allowed
to participate in the tournament held subsequently in February,
2020.

¶31

3. However, the petitioner maintains that though the
circular issued by the fourth respondent stipulates that the
players should have been born in or after 2004, despite the
tournament being postponed, without following the rules with
regard to the age, players aged above 15 were selected and such
players participated in the tournament.

¶32

4. When the matter was last taken up on August 26, 2021,
it was submitted on behalf of the Amateur Soft Tennis Federation
of India, the fourth respondent herein, that the national body
had been required by the relevant Union ministry to furnish an
explanation in respect of the same matter. The order dated
August 26, 2021 permitted the petitioner to make a
representation to the Union Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports.

¶33

5. Since it now appears that the relevant ministry of the
Union has taken up the matter, it may be appropriate to permit
the petitioner to carry his grievance to such ministry for the
matter to be resolved, including as to whether the certificates
that may have been awarded to participants at the relevant
tournament, who were aged above 15 years, would be valid or not.

¶34

6. W.P.No.4433 of 2021 is disposed of by leaving the
primary issue canvassed by the petitioner open and by permitting
the petitioner to carry a representation in respect of the
matters complained of to the Union Ministry of Youth Affairs and
Sports. The Secretary in such ministry should look into the
grievances and the point of view of the respondents herein,
including the State Association and the National Association,
before taking a reasoned decision within a period of twelve
weeks of the receipt of the petitioner's representation in such
regard. The petitioner's representation must be reached to the
Secretary within a fortnight from date.

¶35

There will be no order as to costs.

¶36

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar

¶37

// True Copy //

¶38

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶39

sasi

¶40

To:

¶41

1. The Secretary
 Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports
 Union of India
 Room No.401, C Wing, Shastri Bhawan
 New Delhi.
2. The Member Secretary
 Sports Development Authority of Tamil Nadu
 No.116-A, EVR Periyar High Road
 Nehru Park, Chennai – 600 084.
3. The District Collector
 Collector's Office
 Salem.

¶42

4. The Secretary General
 Amateur Soft Tennis of India
 818/33/1, Laxmipura, Near Ankur Mill
 Gitamandir Road, Ahmedabad – 380 022.

¶43

+1CC to M/s.AL.Gandhimadhi, Advocate, SR.No. 44363
+1CC to M/s.P.Veena Suresh, Advocate, SR.No. 44348
+1CC to The Government Pleader, SR.No.44301

¶44

W.P.No.4433 of 2021
RLD(CO)
B.VC (07/09/2021)

P.Gnanaprabhu v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Gnanaprabhu v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.Saravana Selvarathnam Vs the Secretary to Government

Chhavi Pareek Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

Doctors Association for Social Equality Vs The Principal Secretary to Government

M/s.Bhari Metal Fabrication Vs The Authorised Officer

Statco Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S.Narendra Properties Ltd.

A.Manikandan, Vs Mr.v.Sampah