IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER MONDAY, THE 24TH AUGUST 2009 / 2ND BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 23434 of 2009(S) -------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- SHIBU K.PAUL, THOPPIL HOUSE, CHENGALAM P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.A.K.HARIDAS RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF YOUTH AFFAIRS & SPORTS, SHASTRI BHAVAN, NEW DELHI. 2. SPORTS AUTHORITY OF INDIA, J.N.STADIUM, NEW DELHI, REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR. 3. KERALA STATE SPORTS COUNCIL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 4. AMATEUR KABADDI FEDERATION OF INDIA (AKFI), 2 AAKANKSHAR, AJMER ROAD, JAIPUR-302019, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 5. KABADDI ASSOCIATION OF KERALA, KOLLLAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY J.UDAYAKUMAR. 6. J.UDAYAKUMAR, PNAJAVADI, NEAR YMCA CLUB, CHAKA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY SRI.P. PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASST.SOLICITOR GENERAL R3 BY PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHEER,SC,SPORTS COUNCIL R6 BY ADV. SRI.T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R. Bannurmath, C.J. & A.K. Basheer, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 23434 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 24th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. This Public Interest Litigation(PIL) is filed by a person alleged to be a kabaddi player and coach of Kerala Team for 52nd National Kabaddi Championship. He also claims to be the Secretary of District Kabaddi Association, Kottayam and is stated to be working for the promotion of Kabaddi. According to the petitioner, the 6th respondent herein who was a coach for the National Kabaddi team since 2005 has, though history of acting in un-sportsmanship manner, it is learnt by the petitioner that he is proposed to be honoured with prestigious Dronacharya award by the Union of India, Sports Ministry and it is stated that as the career of this 6th respondent is tainted, this Court exercising the extraordinary jurisdiction under the PIL restrain the Sports Ministry from awarding the WP(C) No.23434 of 2009 -:2:- Dronacharya on the 6th respondent. 2. In this regard the allegations raised by the petitioner are that the 6th respondent-J.Udayakumar was found guilty for the charge of molestation of one his students during a train journey which brought up several allegations. Petitioner raises serious allegations of malpractice and corruption against the 6th respondent, relating to the selection of the Indian kabaddi team in the year 2005 and for Non selection of Kabaddi players for the Asian Men's kabaddi championship in the year 2005. Serious allegations are also raised against Sri.J.Udayakumar, for his involvement in getting job to one Rose Mary Presilla in Kerala Government service under the sports quota. 3. These allegations are very vague as they can be. So far as the first allegation of charge of molestation is concerned, it is now brought to our notice that after full fledged enquiry the 6th respondent is exonerated of the charge as it was found to be not proved and especially there was no complaint whatsoever from WP(C) No.23434 of 2009 -:3:- any alleged victim on such molestation. So far as the allegation of corruption and malpractice is concerned in the selection of players for National Kabaddi team in the year 2005 and for the Asian Men's kabaddi championship in the year 2005, the same is very vague and especially noting the fact that we are in the year 2009, this Court,as a fact finding authority, cannot take action as so far there was no complaint from anybody else. 4. So far as other grounds are concerned, they are without any basis and very vague. Keeping in view the guidelines issued by the apex court in respect of entertaining Public Interest Litigation by the Courts as reported in Dattaraj Nathuji Thaware v. State of Maharashtra and others [(2005) 1 SCC 590] we find that the allegations are not only vague but appears to be baseless. Petitioner being a coach himself, it appears to us seeking revenge either out of jealousy or personal vendetta against the 6th respondent. These alone are sufficient grounds to reject the writ petition as mala fide. In the result, the writ WP(C) No.23434 of 2009 -:4:- petition is dismissed with cost of Rs.50,000/- to be paid within one month from today. S.R. Bannurmath, Chief Justice. A.K. Basheer, Judge. ttb