De-recognition Of Association On Account Of Non-Renewal Not Ground To Disregard Achievement Of Participants: AP High Court
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has allowed a plea of a MBBS candidate— who was placed lower in the priority list (at No.91) for admission to the course for the 2025-26 session, and had approached the Court asserting that she ought to have been placed higher on the list (at No.53) on account of her participation in the Senior National Fencing Championship, 2024-25.The Sports Authority of...
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has allowed a plea of a MBBS candidate— who was placed lower in the priority list (at No.91) for admission to the course for the 2025-26 session, and had approached the Court asserting that she ought to have been placed higher on the list (at No.53) on account of her participation in the Senior National Fencing Championship, 2024-25.
The Sports Authority of Andhra Pradesh (Respondent 3) had argued that the petitioner's participation in the Senior Nationals was not considered because the Fencing Association of Andhra Pradesh (Respondent 6)— which conducted the State-Level Championship and issued a backup certificate for the petitioner's participation, had failed to renew its recognition for the year 2024-25. Consequently, the backup certificate issued in favour of the petitioner by the (then de-recognised) Association, reflecting her participation in the State-Level Championship, could not be considered to be in order.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice R. Raghunandan Rao held that failure of renewal and resultant de-recognition of the Association should not be read against the petitioner for depriving her of her achievement of participation at the National Level. The Court thus directed the Sports Authority to consider the case of the petitioner under the sports-quota by considering the certificate produced by her for the Senior National Championship.
The Division Bench reasoned,
“… it can be seen that while it may be true that the Fencing Association of Andhra Pradesh had not sought renewal for the year 2024-25, yet, the achievement of the petitioner at the State Level cannot be disregarded, particularly in view of the fact that she was permitted to participate at the Senior Fencing National Championship 2024-25. The credit and the priority number which is allotted to a candidate in the instant case would be based upon her participation at the Senior Fencing National Championship and not at the State Championship Level, for which no credit is given.”
Background
It was stated that the Respondent 6 Association had been recognised in 2019 and continued to be recognised till 2024- post which it did not apply for renewal of recognition. The Sports Authority emphasised that renewal of recognitions contingent upon compliance with a checklist of conditions issued by the National Sports Development Code, which every Association must satisfy. Reliance was also placed on a Government Order of 2019 which stated that Sports Associations which are not recognised by the Sports Authority of Andhra Pradesh shall be ineligible for issuing sports certificates for purposes of obtaining government sports quotas for education and employment admissions. Thus, in the absence of an application of renewal, the State argued that the petitioner's State-level participation and backup certificate could not be considered.
Examining the relevance of a backup certificate, the Court held—
"The only purpose which is served by requiring a candidate to produce the backup certificate is to ensure that the certificate of participation produced by a candidate at the National Level is genuine and that the National Level participation could be justified only if a candidate had also participated at the State Level. It is only for that reason alone that in our opinion the conditions are fixed for producing the backup certificates.”
The Court thus concluded that de-recognition of the Association on account of non-renewal cannot be an impediment for consideration of the petitioner's case. However, with regard to the doubts raised by the Sports Authority concerning the authenticity and genuineness of the said certificate, the Court left the issue open for further verification, and noted that in case it is found that the certificate was not genuine or forged, the admission granted to the petitioner shall be liable to be cancelled.
The petition was accordingly disposed of.
Case Number: WRIT PETITION NO: 31326 of 2025
Case Title: Krishnamsetty Praneetha V. The State of Andhra Pradesh and others