Amendment To Its Constitution By Gymnastic Federation Of India Does Not Mean Disbanding Or Reconstitution Of Existing Committees: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court observed that amendment to its constitution by the Gymnastic Federation of India does not mean disbanding or reconstitution of existing committees.
The Court was hearing a Writ Petition challenging the communication issued by Gymnastics Federation of India where it expelled the Delhi Gymnastics Association from the affiliation of GFI.
The bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad observed, “…amendment to the constitution did not mean disbanding or reconstitution of the existing Committees, and since the procedure to appoint the disciplinary committee, in both the amended and un-amended constitution, is same and the duties and the powers of the disciplinary committee are unchanged no prejudice has been caused to the Petitioner and, therefore, the very foundation of the case of the Petitioner that the nomination was there in the erstwhile Committee is of no substance.”
Brief Facts-
The Petitioner, Delhi Gymnastics Association an established organisation involved in developing gymnastics in Delhi, faced disciplinary action from the Respondent Gymnastics Federation of India due to alleged irregularities in its election process. The petitioner contested the legality of the disciplinary committee and its jurisdiction. After a hearing, the petitioner was disaffiliated from GFI, prompting a legal challenge.
The Court noted that the functions of the Disciplinary Committee are identical in both the amended and the unamended constitution.
The Court further mentioned that the powers given to the Gymnastics Association of India to initiate disciplinary action, under Section 2 (b) (vii) and 2 (b) (viii), of the amended constitution, is not a new power, but had previously been relegated to the organisation under 26 (iii) of the un-amended constitution. Therefore, according to the Court in any event, the process of appointment of such a disciplinary committee, in both, the amended and un-amended regulations is the same.
The Court stated that nowhere in the rules, either amended or un-amended, does it require a disciplinary committee to be either reconstituted or revalidated after an amendment in the constitution.
According to the Court, the decision-making process by the committee was fair and transparent.
The Court found no substance in the argument of the Petitioner that since the nomination in the Disciplinary Committee was as per the un-amended constitution, the entire process fails as the process for appointing the Disciplinary Committee in the amended and un-amended constitution are identical.
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the Writ Petition.
Cause Title: Delhi Gymnastics Association v. Gymnastics Federation of India (Neutral Citation: 2024:DHC:3562)
Appearance:
Appellant: Adv. Syed Rehan
Respondent: Adv. Parth Goswami, Adv. Akshay Kumar, CGSC Arunima Dwivedi, Adv. Aakash Pathak and Adv. Pinky Pawar
