Delhi High Court Declines To Interfere With Asian Games Dressage Team Selection, Upholds EFI's Selection Criteria
The Delhi High Court has refused to interfere with the selection of the Indian Dressage team for the upcoming Asian Games 2026, holding that the Equestrian Federation of India (EFI) had adhered to its notified selection criteria and that courts cannot substitute the opinion of expert bodies in sports selection matters unless the decision-making process is shown to be arbitrary, capricious or perverse.
Justice Mini Pushkarna observed,
“The selection process followed by the EFI has been found to be fair and in consonance with the Selection Criteria. The selection process is not found to be irrational, arbitrary or perverse in any manner by this Court. As per established law, it is beyond the scope of judicial review by this Court, to substitute its judgment for that of the experts in matters concerning selection of sports persons for international sporting events. “
The bench dismissed two writ petitions filed by riders Sudipti Hajela and Anush Agarwalla challenging the selection list issued by EFI's Ad-hoc Committee on June 16, 2026, for the Dressage discipline at the Asian Games scheduled to be held in Japan from September 19 to October 4, 2026.
Both petitioners had been placed on the reserve list and sought inclusion in the final team.
Agarwalla contended that the EFI had wrongly calculated his Minimum Eligibility Requirement (MER) by refusing to consider his Prix St. Georges (PSG) score from an event held in Hagen, Germany. He also alleged bias against him on the ground that a member of the Selection Committee had ongoing litigation with him and his family.
Hajela on the other hand challenged the methodology adopted by the EFI in preparing the merit list. She argued that Team MERs ought to have been considered first for ranking riders, and only thereafter should individual scores have been taken into account.
Rejecting both contentions, the High Court held that the EFI had correctly interpreted and applied its Selection Criteria. It observed that under the applicable rules, riders based abroad could combine scores from different competitions only where all three mandatory dressage tests were not available at a particular event. Since the Belgium competition in which Agarwalla participated contained all three prescribed tests, he could not selectively rely upon the PSG score from another competition in Germany.
The Court further rejected Hajela's interpretation of the Selection Criteria, holding that the merit list was correctly prepared on the basis of the highest cumulative percentage obtained across the best two valid MERs, without any distinction between Team MERs and Individual MERs. It noted that the Selection Criteria specifically accorded higher merit to riders who had achieved Individual MERs over those who had secured only Team MERs.
The Court also noted that the Selection Committee and the Ad-hoc Executive Committee had independently deliberated upon the performances and MER achievements of all eligible horse-rider combinations before unanimously approving the final list.
The Court also rejected Agarwalla's allegation of bias against a member of the Selection Committee inasmuch he had “acquiesced to the composition of the Selection Committee and waived of any allegation in this regard.”
As such, the Court dismissed both writ petitions and declined to interfere with the selection process.
Appearance: Mr. Kirtiman Singh, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Kritika Gupta, Mr. Mohit Kumar Sharma, Mr. Maulik Khurana, Mr. Ritwik Saha, Advs. along with Petitioner in person; Mr. Kapil Modi, Mr. Rishabh Parikh and Ms. Niyati Kohli, Advocates for R-1 & 2; Mr. Udit Dedhiya, SPC with Ms. Apurva Sachdev, Mr. Preyansh Gupta, Advocate and Mr. Varun Malik, GP for R-4; Mr. Shiv Verma, Adv. for newly impleaded respondent nos. 4 to 6 Mr. Kirat Singh Nagra, Adv. for respondent no. 3/Hriday Chheda. Ms. Geetika Vyas, Adv. for IOA
Case title: Sudipti Hajela v. Equestrian Federation Of India & Ors
Case no.: W.P.(C) 8329/2026