Allahabad HC Upholds NOIDA’s Termination of Cricket Stadium Contract Over Poor Maintenance
The Allahabad High Court has dismissed a petition filed by the Physical Education Foundation of India (PEFI) challenging the cancellation of its contract to operate and maintain the Noida Cricket Stadium.
The bench of Justices Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Vinod Diwakar held that the petitioner had failed to maintain even basic amenities at the facility and directed it to pursue its claims before an arbitrator in line with the contract provisions.
A 15-year agreement was executed on September 24, 2021, between the New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) and the Foundation, permitting it to manage the cricket stadium in Sector 21, Noida. The contract, valid until 2036, was on a revenue-sharing basis, requiring the operator to pay either Rs 1,00,000 or 30 percent of stadium revenue, whichever was higher, to NOIDA.
In July 2024, the Authority issued a show cause notice alleging negligence in maintenance and poor interest in stadium operations. By October 2024, the license was terminated, prompting the Foundation to challenge the action before the high court. In December that year, the high court quashed the termination order for non-consideration of the Foundation’s reply and directed NOIDA to reconsider the matter.
Complying with the direction, the Foundation submitted a detailed response in March 2025. However, the Authority again terminated the agreement on May 27, 2025, citing failure to maintain hygiene and essential facilities such as toilets and seating, which allegedly remained in a shabby state since the takeover.
The Foundation argued before the court that under Clause 5.8 of the contract, major repairs and installations required prior written consent from NOIDA, and it had repeatedly sought permission for installing floodlights and seating arrangements. It accused the Authority of acting arbitrarily, ignoring its communications, and even creating third-party interests in the stadium.
Defending its action, NOIDA submitted that the Foundation had consistently failed in discharging contractual duties. Referring to Clauses 4.1 and 5.2.6 of the license agreement, counsel for the Authority contended that the licensee was responsible for seating, lighting, day-to-day maintenance, and timely payment of dues. The persistent lapses, NOIDA said, resulted in financial loss and underutilisation of a stadium built to international standards.
The bench agreed with the Authority, noting that the Foundation had failed to maintain hygiene and basic amenities for nearly four years. Observing that the contract itself contained a dispute resolution mechanism, the court held that the writ petition was not maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution.
“In the facts and circumstances, we do not find any merit in the instant writ petition, which warrants any interference under Article 226 of Constitution of India,” the judges observed.
At this stage, counsel for the Foundation sought direction that the petition might be dismissed as not pressed, and leave could be accorded to the petitioner to agitate before the Arbitrator in terms of Clause 5.4 of the agreement. The bench accepted the request and clarified that its observations would not prejudice the petitioner’s claims before the arbitrator.
Case Title: M/S Physical Education Foundation of India
Order Date: August 11, 2025
Bench: Justices Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Vinod Diwakar