Andhra Pradesh High Court Asks Sports Minister To Consider Gold Medalist Archer Jyothi Surekha's Representation For Khel Ratna Award

Jyothi Surekha Vennam, an Indian renowned gold medalist archer has approached the Andhra Pradesh High Court challenging the selection procedure adopted to select the receiver of the 'Major Dhyan Chand Khel Ratna Award.'

The petitioner contended that the selection was made against the Scheme and objective of the Award and prayed that the process be reconsidered. It was further brought to the notice of the Court that a representation was made to the Union Minister of Sport, (who is the competent authority for relaxation of any rule in the Scheme) showcasing the irregularities in the selection process, but no action was taken in the said regard.

Justice Ninala Jayasurya after hearing the contentions of the petitioner said that although there is prima facie merit in the case of the petitioner, further deliberation is required in the matter.

"Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the material on record as also the judgment on which reliance is placed, prima facie, this Court sees that there is in the grievance of the petitioner. However, the matter needs to be examined further."

Additionally, the Bench has passed interim orders directing the Union Minister of Sports to consider the representation made by the petitioner, expeditiously.

"In the meanwhile, considering the submission a representation dated 14.12.2023 is made to the Hon'ble Minister of Sports & Youth Affairs, New Delhi/2nd respondent herein, this Court deems it appropriate to pass an interim order providing that necessary action on the same be taken, as expeditiously as possible, before 08.01.2024."

The petitioner has contended that she has been an athlete since the age of 5 and has been representing India in various International Forums including the Asian Games securing gold, silver and bronze medals in Archery. Further that she is not contending that the selection was mala fide, but just not in consonance with the scheme of the award.

She contended that the selection committee does not have discretion in the selection procedure and is bound by the rules of the Scheme.

That the scheme grants 80% marks for medals secured in the preceeding 4 years and on that basis alone she ranks higher than the receivers of the Award. She has relied upon Tatpal Singh Jaggi v. Union of India to bring to the attention of the Court that the Supreme Court had ordered for interim stay in a similar matter.

"Drawing the attention of this Court to the documents evidencing various awards including Award to the petitioner, the learned counsel submits that as per the list of medals won by the petitioner and the points earned as per the criteria fixed by the Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports, the petitioner is eligible for 148.74 points, whereas the respondents 15 and 16 would be eligible for 58.5 points." the Bench noted.

Notices were issued to all parties and the Minister of Sports was directed to take action on the representation submitted by the petitioner by today.

Case no.: W.P. 268 of 2024

Counsel for petitioner: Unnam Sravan Kumar

Counsel for respondents: Jupudi V.K. Yagnadutt

Click Here To Read/Download Order