Court says it cannot compel sports authorities to send an athlete after selection decisions are made, entries were not filed before the deadline, and the Games have already begun
The Delhi High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by athlete Shubham Kumar, who sought directions to the authorities to allow his participation in the 20th Asian Games, 2026 in the men’s 94 kg Jiu-Jitsu category, or alternatively in another eligible weight class.
Justice Amit Mahajan, hearing the matter in W.P.(C) 8613/2026 on September 22, 2026, held that the Court could not exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to compel sporting authorities to send an athlete for an event when no Indian athlete was being sent in that category and the names had not been forwarded before the prescribed cut-off date.
Shubham Kumar had argued that he fulfilled the eligibility criteria and that his candidature had been forwarded by the Jiu-Jitsu Association. He sought a mandamus directing the Union of India and other respondents to process, approve and forward his entry for the Asian Games in the men’s 94 kg category. In the alternative, he requested that he be considered for another eligible category, including the men’s 85 kg class. He also contended that his participation should not be denied because of any dispute regarding the status or recognition of the Jiu-Jitsu Association of India.
Opposing the petition, the respondents submitted that no athlete or Indian contingent was being sent in the petitioner’s category for the Jiu-Jitsu event at the 2026 Asian Games. They further pointed out that the names of athletes had not been submitted by the cut-off date of May 14, 2026.
The High Court noted that this factual position was undisputed and was crucial to deciding the case. The Court observed that the petitioner’s main objective was to secure participation in the Games, but such a direction could not be granted in the circumstances.
In its ruling, the Court emphasized that decisions regarding exclusion or inclusion of athletes in a particular category are taken objectively by competent authorities and subject experts. It said judicial review under Article 226 does not extend to substituting the Court’s view for that of sporting bodies on matters of team selection and participation.
Justice Mahajan held that when the authorities had clearly stated that no athlete was being sent in the concerned Jiu-Jitsu category, and when it was admitted that the names had not been submitted before the deadline, the Court could not direct the respondents to include the petitioner.
The Court also rejected the petitioner’s argument that some allegedly non-qualified candidates had been sent in another category or discipline. It held that such a contention did not improve the petitioner’s case.
Another factor that weighed with the Court was the timing of the petition. Since the 20th Asian Games had already commenced on September 19, 2026, the Court found that no effective relief could be granted at that stage.
Concluding that no ground was made out for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution, the Delhi High Court dismissed the petition.
Bottom Line:
Sports law - Court cannot, in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226, direct sporting authorities to send an athlete for participation in an event when no athlete is being sent in that category and names were not forwarded before the cut-off date - Once the Games have already commenced, no effective relief can be granted.
Statutory provision(s): Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950
Shubham Kumar v. Union of India, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc id # 2992841
