Football Is Popular In India, But No Achievements; Need To Take It Forward : Supreme Court In AIFF Case

The Supreme Court on Wednesday heard the plea in relation to the adoption of the new Constitution of the All India Football Federation (AIFF). The matter was heard by bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Justices Hima Kohli and JB Pardiwala. 

The three issues mentioned before the court by the Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta were– a) finalising the constitution of AIFF; b) issuing directions regarding forensic audits and; c) hearing the contempt petition filed against four administrative members of the AIFF.

In the course of the hearing, CJI Chandrachud amusedly remarked–

"With all this procedural wrangling, when do our players actually play football? The federation is doing every thing but play football here. Fortunately the World Cup is over."

On this note, one counsel submitted that the performance of the Indian football team had been disappointing and that not even one goal had been scored by the team. Here, CJI Chandrachud said–

"The fact that the performance was not of a higher-order is not the point really. When you expose your youngsters to a game, in due course you will have better training, you will have better facilities. Unlike say hockey and cricket, which have really been in that sense national sports, football is a national sport in a sense that all of us have played it as kids. It is a popular sport. But football has not reached there, our level of achievement has not reached that parameter. So we will have to take it forward. We are now in the process of finalising the constitution of the federation. We will have a duly elected body in place taking action against all the wrongdoings which are taking place. So responsible people will now do something in the interest of the sport."

Accordingly, the bench passed an order directing the amicus curiae in the matter to tabulate the objections that had been received about the constitution of AIFF in order to finalise the constitution. The court also directed the report of the forensic audit to be placed before the court master and circulated to the bench.

Senior Advocate Raju Ramchandran, Counsel for AIFF stated that since the contempt petition was against 4 administrative members of AIFF, it would be appropriate to entrust the petition to amicus. The bench agreed with the same and issued notice returnable after 2 weeks in the contempt petition. It directed parties desiring suggestions to draft constitution to suggest the same to the amicus by Friday, 11th November 2022.

The Supreme Court had earlier ended the mandate of the Court-appointed Committee of Administrators and issued directions for elections of the AIFF, following the suspensions of the national football body from the FIFA.

CASE TITLE: AIFF v Rahul Mehra 

Click Here To Read/Download Order