Delhi HC appoints administrator to run affairs of Indian basketball

Nagpur: Three months after members of three state associations went against the election process in the Basketball Federation of India (BFI) for the 2023-2027 term, the Delhi high court appointed justice P Krishna Bhat, former judge of Karnataka high court, as administrator to run the affairs of Indian basketball.
After the first petition filed by the Pondicherry Basketball Association, 20 others had joined as petitioners against BFI and a common order was passed by justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav on Tuesday.
Justice Kaurav said the administrator shall function till a new elected body takes charge of BFI, and asked him to ensure conclusion of the election process at the earliest according to the National Sports Code. The Delhi HC order said, “Hon'ble Mr Justice P. Krishna Bhat, the former judge of the High Court of Karnataka, is appointed as an Administrator of BFI with immediate effect. The Administrator shall function till the newly elected body takes over the charge of BFI. There shall be an endeavour to conclude the election process at the earliest.”
In February, the 21 petitioners told the high court that they were aggrieved by the “illegal” and “improper” rejection of the nominations of several contesting parties by the returning officer on “hyper-technical grounds”.
It was also said that the returning officer (RO) on February 13 declared that the remaining contesting candidates were all deemed to be declared as duly elected unopposed to various posts in BFI. While directing the administrator to run the BFI affairs, justice Kaurav observed that the “RO has erred in rejecting en bloc nomination forms” and set aside the rejection order and declaration of results as they were based on “insignificant and flimsy” reasons.
The court said the new election process will continue from the stage of submission of nomination forms, after treating the rejected nomination forms as valid, and the administrator may even appoint a new RO. “The Administrator shall decide whether the present RO should continue to conduct the election or has to be replaced by another RO. The Administrator shall be at liberty to appoint another RO as he may deem appropriate. The Administrator shall take all steps as may be necessary to conduct the elections of BFI in accordance with the Sports Code and MEG (Model Election Guidelines),” the court said.
In the 77-page order, the court noted that 27 members of the electoral college were against the manner in which the candidates were selected. The RO rejected 15 of the 30 nominations on a singular non-significant ground. Of the 15 valid nominations, 5 candidates withdrew and there was no contest for electing office-bearers of respondent-BFI, which is a national level sports federation.
The court observed that the elections of all national sports federations are to be held in a democratic manner and should be governed by clear, fair and transparent rules, and in the present case, ''the rejection of the nomination forms would invariably lead to the exclusion of the participation of a large number of state representatives'', which cannot be approved.