SACHIT ANAND BHOSALE vs UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE MINISTRY OF YOUTH AFFAIRS AND SPORTS

Judgment text excerpt

34-WP(L)-22336-2024 (OS).DOCX Mayur IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION(ST) NO. 22336 OF 2024 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 10464 OF 2025 Sachit Anand Bhosale ...Petitioner Versus Union Of India Through The Ministry Of Youth Affairs And Sports ...Respondent ______________________________________________________ Mr. R.A. Shaikh, a/w Adv. Hasan Sayed, Adv. R.B. Shinde, for Petitioner. Mrs. Shehnaz V. Bharucha, a/w Mr. Vinit Jain i/b A.A. Ansari, for Respondent No. 1. Mr. Milind More, Addl. GP a/w Nishigandh Patil, AGP for Respondent No. 2-State. Mr. Yash V. Thakur, a/w Ms. Anushka Parab & Pratik Belkar i/by Abhay Parab, for Respondent Nos. 5, 6 and 7. Mr. Ganesh Gadhe (through VC), Adv. Shrirang Katneshwarkar, Adv. Vivek Chauhan, Adv. Sandeep Gupta, for Respondent No.4. ______________________________________________________ CORAM : M.S. Sonak & Advait M. Sethna, JJ. DATED : 03 October 2025 P.C.:- 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Page 1 of 12 34-WP(L)-22336-2024 (OS).DOCX 2. Considering the orders made earlier, we issue the Rule and make it returnable immediately at the request of and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 3. The petitioner challenges the election schedule for the election to elect the executive committee of the Maharashtra State Kabaddi Association (Respondent No. 4) for the term 2024-2028. 4. The petitioner has alleged that the impugned schedule was in total breach of the National Sport Federation Development Code of India, 2011 (‘sports code’ for short), and this was despite specific directions being issued by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of K.P Rao vs. Union of India1, declaring that the sports code would equally apply, inter alia for elections to associa