Delhi High Court Allows Conditional Release of Funds to National Sports Federations, Emphasizes Strict Safeguards to Prevent Misuse and Promote India’s 2036 Olympics Bid

Court’s Decision:

The Delhi High Court allowed the interim release of funds to National Sports Federations (NSFs) through a committee, directing that the funds be strictly utilized for athlete training, participation in international events, and other permissible activities under the Scheme of Assistance to NSFs. The court emphasized stringent safeguards to ensure accountability, explicitly forbidding any misuse of funds by office bearers. The ruling aims to balance India’s ambition to host the 2036 Olympics with the immediate need to develop domestic sports infrastructure and athletes.

Facts:

1. Background on Fund Restriction:
   • Earlier court orders restricted the release of funds to NSFs due to their non-compliance with the National Sports Code and concerns about fund misuse.
   • These restrictions disrupted training programs, international participation, and preparations for the 2036 Olympics bid.
2. Union of India’s Plea:
   • The government sought interim directions to disburse funds for athlete training and sports activities, citing the urgency of India’s intent to host the 2036 Olympic Games.
   • A court-appointed committee was already overseeing fund disbursements to ensure compliance with court orders and safeguards.
3. Petitioner’s Opposition:
   • The petitioner argued that such disbursements contravened earlier court directions and risked misappropriation by NSFs.
   • They emphasized that prior court orders permitted fund release only for specific purposes, such as athlete training, travel, and necessary equipment, and not for administrative or unrelated expenses.

Issues:

1. Whether the interim release of funds to NSFs can be permitted despite prior restrictions due to non-compliance with the National Sports Code.
2. Whether such fund releases are critical for India’s preparation to host the 2036 Olympics and to support domestic sports development.
3. What measures can be implemented to ensure accountability and prevent fund misuse.

Petitioner’s Arguments:

1. The petitioner highlighted consistent non-compliance by NSFs with the National Sports Code.
2. They opposed fund release, asserting that funds may be diverted or misused by office bearers under the pretense of supporting sports.
3. They urged strict adherence to earlier court orders, allowing funds only for specific athlete-focused activities.
4. They stressed that the Union of India had not enacted the necessary legislation to align with court directives issued in prior judgments.

Respondent’s Arguments:

1. The Union of India emphasized the importance of releasing funds to maintain the training and participation of athletes in international competitions, which directly impacts India’s credibility in global sports.
2. The government highlighted that organizing the 2036 Olympics would enhance India’s stature internationally and catalyze sports development domestically.
3. The respondents underscored existing oversight mechanisms, including the committee and audits, to ensure fund accountability.

Analysis of the Law:

1. Previous Orders:
   • The court reviewed its orders dated April 25, 2023, and June 2, 2023, which conditionally allowed fund releases for Asian Games preparation and other international competitions.
   • These orders mandated strict usage of funds solely for athlete-related purposes and established oversight committees to monitor fund allocation and utilization.
2. National Sports Code Compliance:
   • The court noted the continued non-compliance of NSFs with the National Sports Code and the lack of enabling legislation by the Union of India as directed in earlier judgments.
   • Despite these concerns, the court recognized the immediate need to support athletes to prevent adverse impacts on sports development.

Precedent Analysis:

1. Order Dated April 25, 2023:
   • This order allowed fund release under a mechanism involving a three-member committee with athlete representation to oversee disbursements.
   • The court mandated that funds be exclusively utilized for training, travel, and necessary athlete services (e.g., coaches, physiotherapists).
2. Order Dated June 2, 2023:
   • Similar conditions were imposed for releasing funds for the Special Olympics World Games, 2023, with strict prohibitions against administrative expenses unrelated to athletes.

Court’s Reasoning:

1. Balancing Aspirations and Safeguards:
   • The court acknowledged the petitioner’s concerns but emphasized that the development of sports and athletes should not suffer due to procedural delays.
   • Hosting the 2036 Olympics was seen as a significant national aspiration that required immediate groundwork.
2. Oversight Mechanisms:
   • To ensure transparency and accountability, the court expanded the existing oversight committee from five to seven members, including:
     • Two additional members: a Chartered Accountant and a retired government official with expertise in sports administration.
     • Continued quarterly financial reporting to the court.
3. Specific Conditions:
   • The court reiterated that funds must be used exclusively for athlete training, travel, coaching, and essential equipment.
   • Strict prohibitions were placed on fund utilization for office bearers or administrative purposes unrelated to athlete welfare.

Conclusion:

The court granted interim permission to release funds to NSFs under the committee’s supervision, mandating compliance with the safeguards outlined in its previous orders. It emphasized that the ultimate goal was to promote sports development while maintaining strict financial accountability.

Implications:

1. Immediate Impact:
   • The decision ensures that Indian athletes can train and participate in international events without disruption.
   • It facilitates groundwork for India’s 2036 Olympic bid, potentially boosting the country’s global sporting image.
2. Long-term Repercussions:
   • The ruling underscores judicial support for sports development while emphasizing transparency and accountability in public fund management.
   • It serves as a precedent for balancing national aspirations with the need for compliance and oversight.

Also Read – Chhattisgarh High Court: “Procedural Technicalities Should Not Obstruct the Path to Justice”; Reinforces Obligation to Include Indispensable Parties in Legal Proceedings