The Delhi High Court has held that courts cannot interfere with the selection of athletes for international sporting events or direct changes to a finalised contingent unless the decision taken by the authorities is arbitrary.

Justice Amit Mahajan observed that the decision to include or exclude an athlete from a particular category is taken objectively by the authorities and subject experts, keeping in mind the feasibility of sending athletes, and cannot ordinarily be interfered with.

“This Court, while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot issue a writ of mandamus directing the authorities to alter the finalised contingent at this stage or take a different view regarding the eligibility unless the view taken is arbitrary,” the Court said.

It made the observations while dismissing a plea filed by five para-cyclists challenging their exclusion from India's contingent for the 5th Asian Para Games, Aichi-Nagoya 2026, scheduled to be held from October 18 to 24.

The petitioners sought to challenge the sanction order dated October 01, which approved the participation of only one para-cyclist, Arshad Shaik. They also sought permission to participate in the Games at their own expense, contending that vacant slots were available.

The Court held that it could not issue a writ of mandamus directing the authorities to alter the finalised contingent or take a different view regarding eligibility unless the decision was arbitrary.

It observed that the existence of vacant quota slots did not confer an automatic right to participate in the sporting event, as the slots represented only the maximum number of entries permitted and could not cure an athlete's ineligibility.

The petitioners contended that they were unanimously selected by the Selection Committee on July 16, to represent India in para-cycling at the Games.

They argued that they fulfilled the eligibility conditions and were ranked among the top Asian nations in at least one discipline.

Opposing the plea, the Union Government submitted that the petitioners did not satisfy the performance benchmarks prescribed under the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports' circular dated September 24, 2025.

The authorities explained that para-cycling fell within the measurable sports category and that selection was governed by prescribed performance benchmarks rather than rankings alone.

The Court noted that the authorities had assessed the petitioners' performances in the relevant Asian championships and other international events before deciding which athletes met the prescribed criteria.

Rejecting the plea to allow the petitioners to participate at their own expense, the Court observed that such a request was contrary to Clause 12 of the circular, which provides that only sportspersons whose participation has been cleared at government expense can form part of the Indian contingent.

The Court further held that it could not substitute its own assessment of the petitioners' medal prospects for the assessment reflected in the notified criteria, or dilute the standards prescribed by domain experts.

“Even otherwise, the sanctioned contingent has already been finalised and acted upon. No order can be passed at this stage, given that this exercise would undisputedly require multiple administrative clearances,” the Court said.

Finding no grounds to interfere with the sanction order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Court dismissed the petition.