Indian Super League Tender Crisis | Centre Assures Supreme Court ISL Will Be Held

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the Supreme Court on Friday that the Union Government would step in to ensure that the delayed Indian Super League (ISL) is held without placing players at any disadvantage, in light of the failed tender for All India Football Federation's (AIFF) new commercial partner.

“The Minister is aware of the concern. He assured me the ISL must be held. How it is to be held, what sponsors, who will finance etc. can be left to the government. Government will intervene to ensure that ISL is held and our players are not put to any disadvantage”, he said.

Responding to the Court's concern over government interference, Mehta said the government would intervene only to ensure that players were not put at a disadvantage.

“Otherwise we have no role. Ultimate beneficiary is the players who should not be put to any disadvantage either because of lack of sponsor or lack of club owners, whatever”, he said.

A bench of Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Joymalya Bagchi asked stakeholders in Indian football to resolve the crisis surrounding the delayed ISL season. Four entities, including existing partner FSDL, attended pre-bid meetings but eventually did not submit bids.

“There are certain things that Justice Rao has discussed in the recommendations. They can be very good guiding principles. You can sit down to discuss among yourselves. We will leave it to you”, Justice Narasimha said, referring to Justice LN Rao's recommendations in order to find a way forward after the failed tender process.

Senior Advocate Rahul Mehra said news reports indicated that Federation members would not allow the revised Constitution to pass in the General Assembly and asked the Court to state that it already stood adopted. Justice Narasimha said the Court would deal with the issue.

The Constitution was finalised by the Court on September 19, and was adopted by the General Body in October except Articles 23.3 and 25.3(c). Subsequently, the Supreme Court said Article 23.3 need not be adopted, but retained Articles 25.3(c) (a person cannot simultaneously be a member of AIFF Executive Committee and an Office bearer in a member State Association), which remains pending to be adopted.

Justice Narasimha said any action by the government regarding ISL should not create an impression that the government was interfering and said it was only to tide over the situation. Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal said it should not happen that the ISL proceeds while clubs struggle to survive. Sibal was appearing for ISL clubs who have sought amendment of certain AIFF Constitution provisions contending that they made the tender commercially unviable.

Senior Advocate Gopal Sankarnarayanan, the amicus, suggested that the Ministry could meet the clubs. He said the six-to-seven-month ISL window sustains clubs and their staff and that delays in payments could trigger FIFA intervention, which had happened twice before. He said the stakeholders responsible for the current situation included clubs and potential bidders who attended the pre-bid meeting but chose not to submit bids. He suggested that the Ministry could attempt to understand their concerns.

SG Mehta said the government would also examine bidders' concerns and added that the Minister had said that any step taken must comply with FIFA regulations.

“The bidders' concerns also will also be examined by the government. The concerned Minister told me that we will do everything only bearing one factor in mind that anything being done should be in conformity with FIFA regulations, and we may not fall foul of that”, he said.

Sankarnarayanan said there was a perceived notion that the Court's finalisation of the Constitution had caused the tender to fail. He said there was no connection. Mehra added that there was no data to show such a link. However, SG Mehta said he had not come across this perception.

The Court is likely to hear the matter next before December 8, when AIFF's contract with FSDL expires.

Case no. – Civil Appeal Nos. 12591-12592/2025

Case Title – All India Football Federation v. Rahul Mehra and Ors.