Court appoints sole arbitrator to adjudicate disciplinary actions impacting membership and voting rights of football clubs ahead of October 18 elections
In a significant development concerning internal disputes within the Delhi Soccer Association (DSA), the Delhi High Court on October 14, 2026, directed that multiple petitions challenging disciplinary actions be referred to a sole arbitrator. The petitions arose from disciplinary measures allegedly taken without due process against several football clubs, including Ajmal FC, which faced expulsion and bans affecting their membership and electoral rights.
The Court noted that the disputes shared a common factual background and were connected to the upcoming DSA elections scheduled for October 18, 2026. Given the urgency and the need for consistency in adjudication, the Court appointed Ms. Manisha Suri, Advocate, as the learned Sole Arbitrator to hear all related matters.
The petitions under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which typically deal with interim relief before the constitution of an arbitral tribunal, were ordered to be treated as applications under Section 17 of the Act, which permits interim measures after the tribunal is constituted. This procedural adjustment was aimed at streamlining the resolution process and ensuring that interim relief could be granted swiftly.
The Court emphasized that the disciplinary actions, including the indefinite expulsion of Ajmal FC and a two-year ban on one of its members from football-related activities, were challenged on grounds of lack of due process, such as absence of a show cause notice or opportunity for hearing, and violation of the DSA's constitution and statutes. The petitioners contended that these actions unfairly excluded them from the electoral process by omitting them from the draft electoral list published shortly before the elections.
Acknowledging the impending elections, the Court urged the arbitrator to prioritize the applications for interim measures and endeavor to pass appropriate orders before October 18, 2026. The Court clarified that it had not taken any position on the merits of the case and that all parties' rights, objections, and contentions remained fully open for determination by the arbitrator.
The Court also directed the petitioners to provide the arbitrator with the complete record of the proceedings and ensured that all respondents, including a pro forma respondent, were given the opportunity to participate in the arbitration, except where their presence was deemed unnecessary.
This decision underscores the Delhi High Court's commitment to balancing timely justice with procedural propriety in arbitration matters, particularly where electoral rights and governance of sports bodies are concerned. The use of arbitration in such disputes reflects an increasing trend to resolve internal organizational conflicts efficiently while respecting the parties' autonomy and contractual arrangements.
Bottom Line:
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Where connected disputes arise out of same factual matrix and arbitral tribunal has already been constituted in earlier matter, subsequent Section 9 petitions may also be referred to same learned Arbitrator for consistency in adjudication, Section 9 petitions can be treated as Section 17 applications, with request to decide interim relief expeditiously in view of impending elections.
Statutory provision(s):
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Sections 9, 12(2), 17
Ajmal FC v. Sh Anuj Gupta, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2997206
