The good news about the recent judgment in the case of Indian Hockey Federation Versus Indian Olympic Association is enormous significance the Hon’ble Court attached to the 2001 guidelines of Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports. This should give enough headaches to IOA that does not approve of the Ministry’s recent order on age and tenure.
The Hon’ble Court invariably recognizes the role of government in controlling and regulating the National Sports Federations. This should strengthen the hands of MS Gill who is on the verge of reforming and galvanizing the rotting Indian sports bodies.
The judgment also assigns ‘regulator’ role to the ministry.
Another good news is that the High Hon’ble Court also recognizes the fact that both the Ministry and the IOA have the right to deal affiliation and de-recognition of National Sports Federations as per their constitution and guidelines.
The Hon’ble Court does not question these two bodies’ privileges and rights in these aspects.
Then where is the hitch, and why the IOA’s action of suspending the Indian Hockey Federation in 2008 and then the follow up action of Ministry of Youth Affairs Sports has been set aside by the Hon’ble Court?
Because, both these bodies did not follow certain procedures, and did not ensure flow of rules of natural justices, meaning the aggrieved body (IHF headed by KPS Gill) was not served any show case notices anytime in the whole process.
Only time IOA issued a show case notice was to Ad hoc Committee asking them why the IHF should not be suspended! This almost made the theory and practice of natural justice a mockery, as the adhoc committee was formed by the own people who were part of the IOA that took the action.
The Hon’ble Court did not approve of such blatant acts that border stupidity.
This seems to be the typical of Suresh Kalmadi’s administration. He heads such a major organization as IOA, still naïve in administrative procedures, knowingly and unknowingly.
Further, the bodies failed to enquire the whole issue of hockey and its administration instead taken a ‘knee jerk’ reaction.
Both the Ministry and the IOA failed to highlight the fact that the failure of India to qualify for the 2008 Olympics is not just one another victory or failure on sports field, but a failure in 80s years which generated wide public anger.
When the IHF pleaded it’s voice had not been heard in the whole affair by the both MYAS and IOA, therefore their decisions are arbitrary, these organization have nothing substantial to answer.
A perusal of the 43-page judgment also points to the fact that both IOA and MYAS have been loathe to the case in question and even failed to submit to the interims orders of the said court. It seems the court had not been given even basic papers for its consideration. Why these two bodies have taken the case so casually and ignore various orders of the court is not known.
The logic of the Ministry that all its actions are re-actions to the IOA’s action did not cut much ice with the Hon’ble Court. The Hon’ble Court felt that the Ministry should have enquired the whole affair instead of toeing the lines of IOA in first suspending and then de-recognizing the IHF.
However, we will hear the last word on this matter next Monday, when the judgment of the Rahul Mehra’s Public Interest Litigation (PIL) which essentially deal the age and tenure limit, will be delivered.
If the court will uphold the ministry’s order on age and tenure it can make this order not much of use for most of those in the former IHF, who have scored a point with this case going in their favour.
Because then IHF President and Secretary are in the fourth term, president is above 70.
Against this backdrop, one can understand the measured response of former IHF bosses to the judgment.
Things will be clear when the judgment comes on Monday in the PIL; with this the future of Indian sports, not only hockey, will also be decided.