Desirable that AIFF matter is resolved, we want U17 Women's World Cup to be held in India: Supreme Court
India Today
A bench headed by Justice DY Chandrachud made the observations while considering a plea filed by Committee of Administrators seeking contempt action against AIFF’s ex President Praful Patel and others alleging their interference.
In the case regarding a dispute over the All India Football Federation’s management, when India is due to host the 2022 FIFA Under-17 Women’s World Cup in October, the Supreme Court today observed that it wants the issue to be sorted so the world cup can be held in India.
A bench headed by Justice DY Chandrachud made the observations while considering a plea filed by the Committee of Administrators seeking contempt action against AIFF’s ex-President Praful Patel and others alleging their interference.
The Court had, on 21 July 2022, taken notice of the fact that the FIFA under 17 Women’s World Cup is due to commence and India is to host the World Cup. Further, FIFA indicated to COA that the inaugural of the tournament should be carried out under the democratically elected AFIF. The Court had thereafter directed the elections of AIFF’s executive committee be held expeditiously.
The court had clarified that this would be an interim arrangement without prejudice to the rights of parties, and the interim body would continue for a period of three months, so that the constitution can be finalised.
The court was today informed that the Ministry of Sports and Youth Affairs had a meeting with FIFA and in continuation a further meeting will be held, with FIFA, the Ministry and COA, with regard to the World Cup.
Justice Chandrachud then observed “We are holding our balance. We see what’s happening in the case. If it should it come to that, we’ll assert our authority. You want to sort it out with no difficulty as we want the World Cup to be held here. But should it come to it we’ll assert our authority without any exception. It’s desirable the matter is resolved to everyone’s satisfaction.”
The court therefore deferred the hearing of the contempt petition till next date.
