http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 7  

PETITIONER: K. MURUGAN ETC. ETC.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: FENCING ASSN. OF INDIA, JABALPUR & ORS. ETC. ETC.

DATE OF JUDGMENT22/02/1991

BENCH: MISRA, RANGNATH (CJ) BENCH: MISRA, RANGNATH (CJ) KANIA, M.H. KULDIP SINGH (J)

CITATION:  1991 SCR  (1) 658        1991 SCC  (2) 412  JT 1991 (1)   676        1991 SCALE  (1)259

ACT:      Societies   Registration  Act,  1860-Section   3-Indian Olympic Association-Rules and regulation regarding  election of  President-Sports  Association-Responsibility  placed  on society held not responded.      Constitution of India, 1950-Article 136-Appeal  against High  Court  order-Indian  Olympic  Association-Election  to office  of  President-Rule relating to meetings  and  rights appurtenant to elective office-Inapplicability of.

HEADNOTE:      The Indian Olympic Association was a society registered under  the Societies Registration Act,  with  the  principal object to sponsor, supervise, finance, regulate and  control all  aspects  of sports activity in relation to  the  Asian, Commonwealth,  Olympic and International competitions.   The Society had a set of rules and regulations.  There are  five categories  of members described in Rule 3.  The  management of  the  affairs  of  the Association  is  entrusted  to  an Executive  Council  defined in Rule 1(v).  Rule  8  provided that the Executive Council shall have (i) a President,  (ii) 9  Vice Presidents, (iii) a Secretary-General, (iv) 6  Joint Secretaries, (v) a Treasurer and (vi) 19 Members.  The terms of  the Executive Council was to be 4 years, while  Rule  11 provides the voting procedure.      The  Indian Olympic Association was reconstituted  with effect from 28 of October, 1984, with the appellant in  C.A. No.  852  of 1991, Shri V. C. Shukla as  the  President,  K. Murugan, the appellant in C.A. No. 848 of 1991 as one of the 6 Joint Secretaries.      In  November,  1988, one of the Vice-President  of  the 1984 Executive Council, Shri B.S. Adityan, the appellant  in C.A. No. 849/91 was elected as President for a term of  four years.      On  16th  of May, 1990, there was a requisition  of  17 Members  for a special general meeting for  considering  the move of a no confidence                                                        659 motion  against  the  aforesaid Shri B.S.  Adityan  and  his Executive Council.  This initiated a period of confrontation between the two groups in the Association.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 7  

    In  May  1990,  the  Executive  Council  overruled  the aforesaid  requisition  as  invalid  and  President  Adityan called a metting of the General Assembly at Madras for  15th of June, 1990.  For the same day the other group summoned  a meeting at New Delhi.  This aforesaid situation led to Court proceedings,  and  the  Delhi  High  Court  restrained   the requisitionists from holding their meeting at New Delhi  and appointed  a  retired Judge of the Delhi High  Court  as  an observer  for  the meeting to be held at  Madras.   At  this meeting  Shri V.C. Shukla, the appellant in C.A. No.  852/91 claimed to have been elected.      The  matter  was  taken to Court  and  a  Single  Judge decided  in  favour  of Shri  B.S.  Adityan,  the  appellant C.A.No. 8549/91, but when the matter came up before the Full Bench of the High Court, it remitted the matter to a  Single Judge  who  appointed  a  retired Judge  of  this  Court  to discharge  the function of the President of the  Association as  an interim measure.  This Order has been  challenged  by the appellants in Civil Appeals Nos. 852-853/91.      The Fencing Association of India filed a civil suit  at Jabalpur for the declaration that Shri V. C. Shukla had been duly  elected.  The application for injunction  from  having been  rejected by the Trial Judge, an appeal had been  taken to the High Court where the Single Judge ordered status quo. Two Civil Appeals were also filed against this order.      It was contended on behalf of the appellants that under the  rules  the  term of the  President  and  the  Executive Council  was  four  years  and in the  absence  of  a  clear provision  for a vote of no confidence which  would  curtail the  period,  there could be no reduction of the  period  of office,  and that the entire Executive Council could not  be voted out of office by a motion of no confidence.      Disposing of the appeals, this Court,      HELD: 1. Sports in modern times has been considered  to be   a  matter  of  great  importance  to   the   community. International sports has assumed greater importance and  has been in the focus for over a few decades. [664D-E]                                                        660      2. It is unfortunate that the highest body incharge  of monitoring  all aspects of such sports has got  involved  in group fight leading to litigation and the objectives of  the I.O.A. have been lost sight of.  The representation of India in the I.O.A. has been in jeopardy. [664E-F]      3.  The  grooming of amateurs has been  thrown  to  the winds  and the responsibility placed on the Society has  not been  responded.  This, therefore, does not appear to  be  a situation where rights to office will have to be worked  out by  referring  to  the provisions of  the  law  relating  to meetings,  injunction  and rights  appurtenant  to  elective offices. [664F-G]      4.  What  seems to be of paramount importance  is  that healthy  conditions  must be restored as early  as  possible into the working of the Society and a fresh election has  to be  held as that seems to be the only way to get out of  the malady. [644G-H]      5.  The entire nation is looking up to the  results  of the  competitions at the international games when  they  are held.  I.O.A.  has great responsibilities  to  discharge  in organising  and streamlining the national  sport  activities intended for international events.  The monitoring has to be a  continuous  one and unless the scheme is ongoing  and  is made  result-oriented, the international performance  cannot be up to any appreciable level. [664G-665B]      6. This does not appear to be a matter where individual rights in terms of the rules and regulations of the  Society

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 7  

should engage attention. [664D-E]      7.  It  is  appropriate that all  the  litigations  now pending should abate, and for appropriate functioning of the Society  the  litigation  outside the  headquarters  of  the Society should not be permitted. [665B-C]      8.  A fresh Executive Council should be set up and  for that  purpose,  elections should be held within  two  months hence; a retired Judge of this Court is appointed to conduct the  elections  keeping  the provisions  of  the  rules  and regulations  of the I.O.A. in view.  All the proceedings  in the different High Courts abate. [665C-D, G]      9.  It is directed that the Union of India should  take greater interest in organising sports both for national  and international  purposes.   Sports  have a role  to  play  in building up good citizens.  That                                                        661 aspect  should  be  kept in view, while a lot  of  money  is allotted  for  the  purpose of improvement  of  sports,  the result  has  been  considerably poor  and  deceptive.   This aspect of the criticism hear from everywhere in this country shall also be given due consideration. [666A-B]

JUDGMENT:      CIVIL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 848  of 1991 etc etc.      From the Judgment and Order dated 14.12.1990 of  Madhya Pradesh High Court in M.A. No. 227 of 1990. Kapil Sibal, H.N. Salve, J.B. Dadachanji, Mrs A.K. Verma and S. K. Mehta for the Appellants. K.K.  Venugopal, P. Chidambaram, S.S. Ray and P.P.  Tripathi for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by      RANGANATH  MISRA, CJ. The Olympic games are ancient  in origin.   According  to the  Encyclopaedia  Britannica  they commenced  some 3,500 years ago and the name came  from  its association  with  the  place known as  Olympia  in  Greece. These  games were played once in every four years  and  were abolished  in 393 AD by the Roman Emperor Theodosius-I.   In recent  times, they were revived in 1896 and have until  now been  held at the turn of every four years excepting  during the first and the second world wars.  The Olympic games  are one  of the biggest international events and  provide  great opportunities   to  amateur  sportsmen  in   the   different classifications.      Indian participation in the Olympic games dates back to 1900 when a single representative had joined the Olympics at Paris.  Gradually, such participation became more systematic and  broad-based.  While the Ministry of Youth  Affairs  and Sports  of the Union Government looks after  development  of sports  within  the country, the management of  the  Olympic participation  has  been entrusted to a  society  registered under  the Societies Registration Act (21 of 1860) known  by the name ’Indian Olympic Association’ (for short IOA’)      The Memorandum of Association of this society indicates that the principal objects of the society, inter alia,  are: (i) to develop and promote the Olympic movement and  amateur sport, (2) to promote and encourage the physical, moral  and cultural  education  of  the youth of  the  nation  for  the development of character, good heath and good                                                        662 citizenship, (3) to enforce all rules and regulations of the International Olympic Committee (hereinafter referred to  as ’IOC’)  and the IOA; (4) to be the official organisation  in

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 7  

complete  and  sole  charge of all Olympic  matters  in  the country, (5) to educate the public of the country as to  the value  of amateurism in sports; (6) to maintain the  highest ideals  of  amateurism  and  to  promote  interest  therein, particularly in connection with the Olympic games and  other games under the patronage of the IOC as well as the IOA, (7) to  have  full and complete jurisdiction  over  all  matters pertaining  to  the participation of India  in  the  Olympic games and other games under the patronage of the IOC as well as  the  IOA,  (8) to assist in  cooperation  with  National Sports Federations/Associations the selection, training  and coaching  of  the teams that will represent  Indian  in  the Asian,   Commonwealth,  Olympic  and   other   international competitions  and  tournaments, under the patronage  of  the teams  in  the  said  competitions  and  tournaments   after selection, (9) to undertake with the assistance of  National Sports  Federations/Associations the financing,  management, transportation, maintenance and welfare of teams from  India taking  part in the Olympic games and other games under  the patronage  of  the  IOC  as well as the  IOA;  and  (10)  to timulate  the interest of the people of the country  in  the promotion of sports and games in the Olympic programme,  and to  that end the formation of State Olympic Association  for the  development  of  sports and games within  a  State  and National  Sports  Federations for games and  sports  in  the Olympic programme.      We  have  quoted most of the  important  objectives  to bring  it to the forefront that the I.O.A. has been  brought into existence to sponsor, supervise, finance, regulate  and control  all aspects of sports activity in relation  to  the Asian, Commonwealth, Olympic and international  competitions and  tournaments under the patronage of the IOC.  While  its funding is partially out of membership fee, bulk of it comes from Government contribution.      The society has a set of rules and regulations.   There are five categories of members as described in rule 3.   The management of the affairs of the Association is entrusted to an Executive Council defined in rule 1(v).  Rule 8  provides that the Executive Council shall have (i) a President (ii) 9 Vice-Presidents  (iii)  a  Secretary-General  (iv)  6  Joint Secretaries  (v)  a Treasurer (vi) 7  Members  elected  from among  representatives  of State  Olympic  Associations  and (vii)  12 members elected from among the representatives  of National   Sports  Federation/Association/  SSCB.   Rule   8 provides the manner of elections to be held                                                        663 for  the  Executive  Council.  The  term  of  the  Executive Council is 4 years.  Rule 11 provides the voting  procedure. Clause (b) of that rule requires that voting if necessary in the  IOA Executive Council, IOA Emergency Executive  Council and/or at the annual general or special general meetings  of the  IOA  shall  be  by show of  hand.   However,  if  in  a particular  case the procedure has to be changed,  the  same will be done by a resolution of the concerned body passed by majority  vote.   The very rule provides as  to  the  voting power of the different units composing the IOA.      Rule   12  deals  with  the  office-bearers  like   the President,  the Vice-President, the  Secretary-General,  the Joint Secretaries, the Treasurer etc.  For the resolution of the  dispute before us perhaps reference to the other  rules is not necessary.      The  IOA  was reconstituted with effect  from  28th  of October,  1984,  with  appellant Shri  V.C.  Shukla  as  the President.  K.  Murugan, appellant in C.A. No. 848  of  1991 (arising  out  of  SLP  1064/91) was  one  of  the  6  Joint

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 7  

Secretaries.      In November, 1988, Shri B.S. Adityan, one of the  vice- President  of  the  1984 Executive Council  was  elected  as President  for a term of four years.  On 16th of May,  1990, there was a requisition of 17 Members for a special  general meeting  for considering the move of a no confidence  motion against  Shri Adityan and his Executive Council.  With  this started a period of confrontation between the two groups  in the  Association.   In  May,  1990,  the  Executive  Council overruled  the requisition as invalid and President  Adityan called a meeting of the General assembly at Madras for  15th of June, 1990.  For the same day the other group summoned  a meeting  of the general assembly at New Delhi.  This led  to Court  proceeding  and the Delhi High Court  restrained  the requisitionists from holding their meeting at New Delhi  and appointed  a  retired Judge of the Delhi High  Court  as  an observer  for  the  meeting to be held at  Madras.   In  the convened meeting of 15th of June, minutes of the proceedings whereof have been seriously disputed Shri Shukla claimed  to have been elected.      A  little  before the meeting of the 15th  of  June  at Madras,  further proceedings were taken in Court which  have been  labelled as collusive and manipulations for  obtaining an  order  for the manner of voting.  The  warring  factions lost sight of the laudable goals of the IOA and the  purpose for  which  the Association had been set up  and  put  their entire attention on winning control over the affairs of  the IOA in their grip through litigation.                                                        664      A Single Judge of the Madras High Court having  decided in favour of Shri Adityan, the matter ultimately came before a Full Bench which by its order dated 3rd of January,  1991, remitted  the  matter  to  the  learned  Single  Judge   and appointed Justice Natarajan, a retired Judge of this  Court, to discharge the functions of the President of the IOA as an interim  measure.  This order is challenged in the    appeal by  Shri  Murguan  and Shri V.C.  Shukla  by  two  different appeals  being Civil Appeals Nos. 852.853 of  1991  (arising SLPs 1599 and 1787/91).  Not content with the litigation  in the Delhi and Madras High Courts, the Fencing Association of India filed a civil suit at Jabalpur asking for  declaration that  Shri  Shukla had been duly elected as  President.   An application for injunction in support of Shri Shukla  having been  rejected by the trial Judge an appeal had  been  taken before  the High Court where a learned Single Judge  made  a status  quo  order.   The other two  appeals  arise  out  of proceedings including contempt taken therein.      Long  arguments  have been advanced before  us  by  Mr. Venugopal for Shri Adityan and by Mr. Sibal for Shri Shukla. The main contention of Mr. Venugopal is that under the rules the terms of the President and the Executive Council is four years and in the absence of a clear provision for a vote  of no. confidence, which would curtail the period, there  could be  no reduction of the period of office.  It has also  been contended  that  the entire Executive Council could  not  be voted  out  of  office by a motion  of  no  confidence  and, therefore,   Shri   Adityan  had   rightly   overruled   the requisition.   Serious  challenge has been advanced  by  Mr. Sibal against the proceedings taken before the  Madras  High Court  and particularly, the learned Judge making  an  order changing  the manner of voting from show of hands to one  by ballot in what is stated to be a collusive proceeding.      This  does  not  appear  to us to  be  a  matter  where individual  rights in terms of the rules and regulations  of the  Society should engage our attention.  Sports in  modern

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 7  

times has been considered to be a matter of great importance to the community.  International sports has assumed  greater importance and has been in the focus for over a few decades. In some of the recent Olympic games the performance of small States  has  indeed been excellent and  laudable  while  the performance  of  a  great country like  India  with  world’s second  highest  populations  has  been  miserable.   It  is unfortunate  that the highest body in charge  of  monitoring all  aspects of such sports has got involved in group  fight leading to litigation and the objectives of the Society have been lost sight of.  The representation of India in the  IOA has been in jeopardy.                                                        665 The  grooming of amateurs has been thrown to the  winds  and the  responsibility  placed  on the  Society  has  not  been responded.   This, therefore, does not appear to us to be  a situation where rights to office will have to be worked  out by  referring  to  the provisions of  the  law  relating  to meetings,  injunction  and rights  appurtenant  to  elective office.   What  seems to be of paramount importance  is  the healthy  conditions  must be restored as early  as  possible into the working of the Society and a fresh election has  to be  held as that seems to be the only way to get out of  the malady.   The entire nation is looking up to the results  of the  competitions at the international games when  they  are held.   As  we  have  already pointed  out,  IOA  has  great responsibities  to discharge in organising and  streamlining the  national  sport activities intended  for  international events.   The  monitoring  has to be a  continuous  one  and unless  the scheme is ongoing and is  made  result-oriented, the   international   performance  cannot  be  up   to   any appreciable level.      The question for consideration, therefore, is not as to which  of  the two factions should succeed.   On  the  other hand, it is appropriate that all the litigations now pending should   abate.    In  the  interest  of   the   appropriate functioning  of  the  Society  the  litigation  outside  the headquarters  of  the Society should not be  permitted.   We accordingly  direct that any litigation, if at  all,  should only be within the jurisdiction of the Delhi High Court  and no  Court in India would entertain litigations  relating  to the  functioning  of IOA in any aspect.  A  fresh  Executive Council  should  be set up and for  that  purpose  elections should  be  held  within  two  months  hence.   The  general assembly  should be convened to meet at Calcutta on 28th  of April, 1991.  We appoint Mr. Justice A.D. Koshal, a  retired Judge  of  this Court to conduct the elections  keeping  the provisions of the rules and regulations of the IOA in  view. Voting shall be by secret ballot.  The list of voters should be  finally settled within four weeks from now and if it  is necessary  to  have any hearing in the matter  we  authorise such hearing to  be undertaken by Mr. Justice Koshal.  Until then,  Mr. Justice Natarajan will continue to  exercise  his powers  as conferred by the order of the Madras High  Court. Once the results of the elections are announced, Mr. Justice Natarajan  would cease to be in office and  the  Association would take over.      To   enable  Mr.  Justice  Koshal  to   discharge   the obligations cast upon him by this decision, the Ministry  of Youth  Affairs  and  Sports  is directed  to  place  at  his disposal  a sum of Rs.25,000 (Twenty five  thousand)  within two  weeks and a small group of assistants as he  may  need. Payment of remuneration for the work done shall be fixed  by the Court later.                                                        666

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 7 of 7  

    All the proceedings in the different High Courts abate; the  suit in the Jabalpur High Court shall stand  dismissed. The contempt proceedings now pending shall not be  proceeded with.      In the course of arguments some criticism was  advanced against  the  order  of the  High  Court  providing  monthly remuneration to Mr. Justice Natarajan.  We leave this aspect to be considered by Mr. Justice Natarajan himself and do not propose to deal with it in our order.      Before we leave this matter we would like to point that the   Union  of  India  should  take  greater  interest   in organising  sports  both  for  national  and   international purposes.   Sports have a role to play in building  up  good citizens.   That aspect should be kept in view.  We  have  a feeling  that  while  a lot of money  is  allotted  for  the purpose  of  improvement  of sports,  the  result  has  been considerably  poor  and deceptive.  We hope and  trust  that this  aspect of the criticism heard from everywhere in  this country shall also be given due consideration. V.P.R.                                  Appeals disposed of.                                                        667