GYMNASTIC FEDERATION OF INDIA (GFI) Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Th. Ibohal, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the applicant; Shri I. Lalitkumar, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the respondent No. 4/ petitioner; Shri Ruchi Mishra and Shri Ajoy Pebam, learned Advocates appearing for the respondent No.3 and Shri W. Darakishwor, learned Senior PCCG appearing for the Union of India.

(2.) This is an application filed by the applicant namely, the Gymnastic Federation of India (hereinafter referred to as 'the GFI') through its President praying for its impleadment as respondent No.4 in the writ petition on the inter-alia grounds that although the applicant is a necessary party, it has not been impleaded as party respondent in the writ petition and that unless the applicant is impleaded as a party respondent, its interest will suffer an irreparable lost. It has further been stated by the applicant that the impleadment of the applicant as party respondent in the writ petition will not prejudice the case of the respondent No.4/petitioner and rather, it will help this Hon'ble Court in deciding and determining the issue involved herein.

(3.) A reply affidavit has been filed by the respondent No.4/ petitioner raising an objection as to the maintainability of the application stating that the application cannot be filed by the GFI through its President in view of Rule 31(b) of the Gymnastic Federation of India Constitution which provides that the GFI may sue or be sued in the name of the General Secretary. It has further been stated that the respondent No.4/petitioner is still serving as the General Secretary of the GFI and therefore, the GFI cannot be impleaded as a party respondent through its President. Since the respondent No.4/petitioner has no grievance against the GFI, the applicant is not a necessary party. In other words, no relief has been prayed for by the respondent No.4/petitioner against the applicant and moreover, the applicant has no locus standi to contest the writ petition as per its own constitution. The respondent No.4/petitioner is aggrieved only by the actions of the Union of India. Out of the two impugned letters dated 27-04-2020 and 06-07-2020 issued by the Union of India, the last one was addressed to the GFI through its President but the address given therein is that of the respondent No.4/petitioner which shows that the expression 'the President' appears to have been inadvertently used in place of the expression 'the General Secretary'. It has also been stated that it is settled position that an application cannot be made mechanically without showing any material as to how the applicant would assist the Court in the matter. The manner in which the applicant has approached this Court appears to be intended to delay the present proceedings and to deny the prayers of the respondent No.4/petitioner. The respondent No.4/petitioner being eligible and qualified in terms of the National Sports Development Code 2011, submitted his nomination papers for the post of the General Secretary in the election held in the year, 2019 which were accepted by the RO and no one was aggrieved by it. Therefore, the question of impleadment of the applicant as party respondent in the writ petition does not arise at all and if the applicant wishes to assist the Court, it could do so as an intervener.