The contentious issue of selecting the best possible candidate to represent the country in an international competitive event should be left to the experts and courts should not interfere in selection criteria laid down by a national sports federation, the Delhi High Court said today.
The court said this while dismissing a petition filed by a woman para-athlete who had challenged the action of the Centre and Sports Authority of India (ASI) in not selecting her for participation in the Discus throw event at the upcoming Rio Paralympic Games, 2016, which is scheduled from September 7.
Para-athlete Karamjyoti had also sought a direction to reconduct the selection trials in a "fair and transparent manner".
Referring to the June 6 judgement of the high court in the matter of two-time Olympic medallist wrestler Sushil Kumar, Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva said, "I am in complete agreement with the view taken in the case of Sushil Kumar that the decision, who should represent India in a sporting event, is best left to the experts.
"In the matter of selecting the best possible candidate to represent India in an international competitive event, there cannot be any interference by this court in the selection criteria set down by the national sports federation concerned and also as to how the relative merits of the different candidates are to be evaluated, which is for the experts to decide and not this court," the judge said.
The court said that the selection process in the matter was done in a "fair and transparent manner" and no interference in it was called for.
"The selection has been made by the expert selection committee based on the performance during Selection Trials and the status of athletes in comparison to the world rankings. I do not find the procedure adopted to be arbitrary, perverse or irrational," Justice Sachdeva said.
The judgement came on a petition filed by Karamjyoti who had said that she had won a quota for upcoming Rio-Paralympic Games on the basis of the international paralympic committee Athletics Marathon World Cup (London), 2016 method, one of the qualification systems prescribed by qualification guide issued by the international paralympic committee for the Rio Games.
She claimed that as per international paralympic committee regulations, as she has earned the quota so she has the right to be sent for participation in the Rio Games.
The petitioner had alleged that the selection trials
conducted by SAI were "not fair and were biased" as the throws by the other para-athlete, who has been nominated to represent India, were fouls.
During the hearing on the plea, a three-member panel was constituted to examine the official video recording of the selection trials of the other para-athlete.
Referring to the report of the panel, the court said that the committee has "unanimously reached the conclusion that the decision taken by the officials of the selection committee" regarding the throws made by other para-athlete, was correct.
On the issue raised by the petitioner that she had the right to represent India as she had earned qualification slot, it said that the qualification guide issued by international paralympic committee for the Rio Games "clearly stipulates that the qualification slot is allocated to the National Paralympic Committee and not to the individual athlete".
"The selection of athletes has been done by specialists in the field. They have adopted a fair and transparent method of conducting selection trials," it noted.
