The petition filed by former Union Sports Minister and five-time BJP MP Anurag Singh Thakur. He has challenged what he called his “arbitrary” disqualification from contesting the Boxing Federation of India (BFI) presidential elections.
NEW DELHI: 19th May: The Supreme Court recorded that the petitioners, including the Himachal Pradesh Boxing Association and other concerned parties, have challenged the interim order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court.
This order had stayed certain directions issued earlier by the Single Judge, which were related to the conduct of the BFI elections. The Division Bench’s stay was primarily based on jurisdictional grounds.
The petition filed by former Union Sports Minister and five-time BJP MP Anurag Singh Thakur. He has challenged what he called his “arbitrary” disqualification from contesting the Boxing Federation of India (BFI) presidential elections.
The matter will be heard by a bench consisting of Justice Surya Kant and Justice NK Singh.
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing on behalf of Anurag Thakur, informed the court about the background of the case. He said:
“The elections were originally scheduled for March. For Himachal Pradesh, I was duly nominated as a representative.”
He explained that a later resolution changed the rules and allowed only elected members to take part in the elections, thereby blocking Thakur’s participation.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Issues Notice on Disability Reservation in Promotions for Judicial Officers
He added:
“However, a subsequent resolution restricted participation only to elected members. When this issue was challenged before a Single Judge bench, an interim stay was granted. The matter was then appealed before a Division Bench, which has also issued a stay order on the resolution.”
Justice Surya Kant remarked:
“The Division Bench has determined no jurisdictional grounds exist here…we’re solely examining jurisdiction…you should present these arguments before the High Court.”
Rohatgi continued his plea, saying:
“The election directly impacts Himachal Pradesh as I was the designated voter. The current stalemate has prevented BFI elections altogether…I respectfully urge Your Lordships to establish a timeline for conducting these elections.”
Justice Suryakant replied:
“Our bench is currently seized with a related matter concerning the Kabaddi Federation. For judicial consistency, it would be preferable to have a single High Court’s perspective on such issues. We may consider referring this to the Delhi High Court for examination. Would it not be appropriate for all parties to present their case there?”
At this point, the counsel representing the respondents alleged that there was a deliberate attempt to move the case across multiple courts, saying:
“Your Lordships, we’re observing a concerning pattern of forum shopping across multiple jurisdictions in this matter.”
Justice Surya Kant responded to this allegation, saying:
“The substantive issue before us today is whether, apart from Bombay High Court, there should be a centralized adjudicatory platform – particularly given that all relevant Ministries and administrative bodies are headquartered in Delhi.”
To this, Senior Advocate Rohatgi strongly reacted:
“With respect, the Respondents’ strategy appears designed to deliberately prolong proceedings rather than address substantive issues.”
Himachal Pradesh High Court Order
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has given permission to BJP MP Anurag Thakur to submit his nomination for the Boxing Federation of India (BFI) elections. This decision came in response to a petition filed by the Himachal Pradesh Boxing Association (HPBA) and another party against the Union of India and others.
Justice Ajay Mohan Goel directed the BFI to extend the deadline for nominations so that Anurag Thakur could submit his nomination and take part in the BFI’s Annual General Meeting.
He also allowed Thakur to
“Fully participate in it including but not limited to the contest for any post for the BFI.”
The election process will continue, but the final result will depend on the outcome of the case filed by HPBA. This case was against the rejection of Thakur’s nomination, which was done by BFI President Ajay Singh. The court order stated:
“Accordingly, as an ad-interim measure, this Court stays the operation of Notice, dated 07.03.2025, as well as the rejection of nomination of one of the two nominated members by petitioner No.1, namely, Mr. Anurag Singh Thakur and directs respondent No.3-Federation [BFI] to treat the nomination of Mr. Anurag Singh Thakur alongwith the nomination of Mr. Rajesh Bhandari to be a valid nomination for the Electoral College by petitioner No.1 and proceed with the election process in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of respondent No.3”
The case was about a notice issued by BFI President Ajay Singh, which rejected Anurag Thakur’s nomination for the elections. The High Court examined whether this rejection was valid under BFI regulations.
Justice Ajay Mohan Goel pointed out that the BFI President is not the General Council of the organization. Therefore, he does not have the authority to issue notices regarding the interpretation or implementation of BFI Regulations on his own.
