The Supreme Court in the case Jharkhand Olympic Association Vs. Rahul Mehra observed wherein the High Court had restrained the President, Indian Olympic Association from conducting the Special GBM which was scheduled to be held on 25.04.2022. The Top Court further dismissed SLP assailing Delhi High Court’s order dated 04.22.2022.
The Court observed, in the present case:
The Special GBM if convened at his stage and could lend to unsavoury incidents including issues of law and order Because of the evident vertical split between the factions led by the Secretary General and the President of the IOA.
A meeting cannot be called except in accordance with IOA’s Rule as the term of IOA’s Management Committee has already expired on 14th December 2021.
If the meeting is without authority and illegal then it will be a wasteful exercise and the costs for wasteful expenses should be recovered from the person at whose instance the IOS are being deprived of its monies but that is another matter. For the moment, the convening of the proposed Special GBM will not be prudent as It is said that the monies that are likely to be expended will be in the range of 65 to 70 lakhs for the proposed Special GBM.
The Case before the High Court:
the convening of such a meeting at this current juncture was not likely to yield any worthwhile result except providing an occasion to manifest more acrimony and a stiffening of positions between the two factions and Counsel for the Government of India while urging the High Court to appoint a retired Judge as an Administrator had submitted that due to the bitter opposition between the rival factions of the Secretary General and President of the IOA.
The bench comprising of Justices Manmohan and the Justice Najmi Waziri observed even when judgment has been reserved in the writ petition which covers issues concerning the Constitution of the IOA, as well as Members of its GBM who may or may not be eligible to vote or participate in a GBM, The IOA ‘President’ has sought to convene a Special GBM.
The petition was listed before the vacation bench comprising of Justice DY Chandrachud and the Justice Bela M Trivedi observed that an impugned judgement passed by Delhi High Court on the ground in an application preferred by Secretary General of the IOA seeking a stay on the Special GBM on the grounds that the President’s scheduling of the meeting was illegal and is contrary to IOA’s Rules thereafter without any authority vested in him and was an endeavour to create elbow-room for an individual to assert his influence on persons who may be part of the IOA’s GBM.
