High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/20040/2022disposed of

Handball Federation Of India v. Union Of India And ORS

2026-03-23Mr. Justice Jagmohan Bansal2 pages

IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH CORUT AT

CHANDIGARH 109+283 CWP-20040-2022 (O&M) Date of Decision: 01.12.2022 HANDBALL FEDERATION OF INDIA ... Petitioner

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ.

Present:

Mr. D.S. Patwalia, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Vaibhav Narang, Advocate and Mr. Gaurav Patwalia, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sudhir Nar, Sr. Panel Counsel for respondent No.1.

None for respondent No.2.

Mr. Anil Mehta, Advocate and Ms. Sukriti Kaur, Advocate for respondents No.4 to 6.

None for remaining respondents.

**** VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (ORAL) The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents No.1 and 2 to not act on the letter dated 15.08.2022 (Annexure P-13) whereby the Asian Handball Federation has recommended International Handball Federation as well as Indian Olympic Association (respondent No.2) to change the name and logo from the Handball Federation of India to Handball Association (India) on their website and the record. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) No.14533 of 2022 had appointed Justice L. Nageshwar Rao, Former Judge, Supreme Court of India with the task of preparation of voters list for conducting elections to the Indian Olympic Association.

He contends that the petitioner as well as respondent-Association had submitted their stake as the voters for the Indian Olympic Association. After affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as respondent No.4 RAJENDER KUMAR 2022.12.

CWP-20040-2022 (O&M) -2- - Handball Association (India), the One Man Committee of Justice L. Nageshwar Rao has accepted the claim of the petitioner to be an elector to the Indian Olympic Association and has been given right to cast its vote. He contends that at this juncture he would be satisfied in case the respondent Indian Olympic Association is directed to pass a reasoned and speaking order after considering the present petition as a representation and affording hearing to the respective parties in light of the documents appended herewith as also the subsequent developments.

There is no representation on behalf of respondent No.2 - Indian Olympic Association despite service and being duly represented on the last date of hearing.

In view of the order which this Court proposes to pass, there is no reason to await filing of formal reply by the Indian Olympic Association. The present writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2- Indian Olympic Association to treat the present petition as a representation and to pass a reasoned and speaking order on the claim raised by the petitioner herein after affording an opportunity of hearing to the respective parties within a period of four months from the receipt of a certified copy of this order.

Petition stand disposed of accordingly.

Any other misc. application(s) also stand(s) disposed of accordingly.

(VINOD S. BHARDWAJ) 01.12.2022.

JUDGE rajender Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No RAJENDER KUMAR 2022.12.12 11:18 i attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document