CHENNAI: After years of court cases and hearings, the Equestrian Federation of India (EFI) office bearers have been replaced by an ad hoc administrative committee (AAC) through a court order on Tuesday.
The Rajasthan Equestrian Association approached the Delhi High Court in 2019 first and after subsequent petitions and hearings in different writ petitions over the years, the Delhi High Court finally placed the reins of the EFI with an AAC that will look after the day-to-day functioning of the federation.
“Pending the conduct of elections, the Respondent No. 1/EFI cannot be left without any office bearers. However, in view of what has been discussed above, this Court cannot in good conscience leave the functioning of the Respondent No. 1/EFI solely in the hands of those office bearer(s) whose tenure has expired and who are acting in a capricious manner and in violation of the directives of the Court.”
The court felt it would be prudent to have an AAC in place until the elections are conducted under the provisions of the Sports Code. The AAC are — Former Delhi HC judge Najmi Waziri (chairperson), former Election Commissioner of India SY Quraishi (observer) and Rohini Musa (member). The court has said that the AAC chief will be paid Rs 5 lakh a month but has not fixed a deadline by which the elections should be conducted. In fact, the court has said that: "This interim arrangement shall continue until further orders of the Court."
It has to be noted that Quraishi had been appointed as EFI observer way back in 2019 and his observations too were recorded in the order. "The Observer... highlighted that there is a conscious and concerted effort to prevent him from gaining access to the records of Respondent No.1/EFI. The Observer has also highlighted that there are numerous instances of maladministration in the Federation and that the administration is being carried out in a non-transparent manner," the order observed.
The court also pulled up the EFI for mis-match in the affidavit and video recording. "This Court is appalled to find that the Transcript placed on record with the Affidavit of the Secretary General of Respondent No. 1/EFI, does not match with the video recording as filed by the Respondent No. 1/EFI," said the order.