Court dismisses petitions challenging the selection process, affirming adherence to prescribed criteria and expert discretion.
The Delhi High Court has dismissed petitions challenging the selection process of athletes by the Equestrian Federation of India (EFI) for the upcoming Asian Games 2026 in Japan. The petitions, filed by Sudipti Hajela and Anush Agarwalla, questioned the selection criteria and process that placed them in the reserve list rather than the final team for the Dressage discipline.
The court, presided by Justice Mini Pushkarna, emphasized that judicial interference is limited to instances where the decision of an expert body is arbitrary, capricious, or irrational. The judgment reiterated that courts should not substitute their judgment for that of expert bodies unless the process is demonstrably flawed.
The EFI had selected six athletes, placing Hajela and Agarwalla as reserves. The petitioners contended that the selection was biased and failed to adhere to the established criteria, specifically challenging the calculation of Minimum Eligibility Requirements (MERs) and alleging bias in the selection committee.
Justice Pushkarna found no merit in the allegations, stating that the selection was conducted in accordance with the prescribed criteria. The court noted that the criteria, as amended in April 2026, required athletes to achieve MERs through recognized competitions, with rankings based on cumulative percentage scores across the best results. The court highlighted that the selection process, including the calculation of scores and the composition of the team, adhered to these criteria.
The judgment also addressed the contention that no subsequent trials among probables were conducted due to logistical challenges, citing that the final decision was based on objective criteria and expert deliberations. The court emphasized that the absence of further trials did not invalidate the selection process.
The court dismissed claims of bias, noting that objections to the selection committee's composition were not raised during the selection process. The court underscored that a party cannot challenge the process on grounds of bias after participating without objection.
In conclusion, the Delhi High Court affirmed the EFI's selection process as rational and in line with the prescribed criteria, thereby dismissing the petitions. The decision underscores the judiciary's deference to expert bodies in matters of sports selection, provided the process is fair and reasonable.
Bottom line:-
Selection of athletes for international competitions must be carried out as per the prescribed selection criteria. Courts in writ jurisdiction should not interfere with decisions of expert committees unless they are shown to be arbitrary, perverse, or manifestly unreasonable.
Statutory provision(s):
Constitution of India, 1950 Article 226
Sudipti Hajela v. Equestrian Federation of India, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc id # 2931816
