Supreme Court Transfers BFI Election Dispute From Himachal To Delhi HC

The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh passed the order with the consent of all parties involved, including the BFI and the Himachal Pradesh Boxing Association (HPBA).

The Bench observed that consolidation of proceedings before a single forum would promote judicial efficiency and coherence. “Ideally, we should have the viewpoint of one High Court,” the Court noted.

As per the Supreme Court’s order, all pending cases before the Himachal Pradesh High Court, including the petitions filed by BJP leader and former Union Sports Minister Anurag Thakur and the HPBA, stand disposed of, with liberty to the petitioners to either file fresh petitions in the Delhi High Court or join the ongoing matters already listed for hearing there.

The Apex Court further clarified that the stay granted by the Himachal Pradesh High Court Division Bench, which had effectively halted the BFI election process, shall continue to remain in force for a period of six weeks, during which parties may approach the Delhi High Court to seek its continuation or modification.

The respondents, including the BFI, assured the Court that they would not object to proceedings before the Delhi High Court on territorial jurisdiction grounds.

The case originated from a challenge to the disqualification of Anurag Thakur from contesting the BFI presidential election scheduled for March 28.

Thakur, an executive member of HPBA, contended that he had been lawfully nominated by the association, a state unit affiliated with BFI. However, his nomination was allegedly rejected arbitrarily on March 18, without prior notice or an opportunity of being heard.

The rejection stemmed from a March 7 notification issued by Ajay Singh, the outgoing BFI President, which limited electoral participation to elected representatives of affiliated state units.

This move allegedly disqualified Thakur and several others from contesting the election. The petitioners claimed that the notification was contrary to the BFI’s Memorandum of Association and violated the National Sports Development Code of India, 2011.

Initially, a single-judge Bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court had stayed Thakur’s disqualification and directed the BFI to reopen nominations. However, this relief was overturned by a Division Bench, which cited lack of jurisdiction, prompting the petitioners to approach the Supreme Court.

While arguments were raised before the Supreme Court regarding the possible infructuousness of the matter due to recent developments in the international recognition of BFI, the Court chose not to delve into that issue, limiting itself to resolving the procedural impasse created by multiple litigations across jurisdictions.