Asian Para Games: Delhi HC dismisses badminton player’s plea against BAI’s selection criteria
The high court said that the above mentioned decision by the representatives of the BAI and PCI cannot be faulted with
New Delhi: Ahead of Asian Para Games 2023, to be held in China in October, a para athlete’s petition has been dismissed by the Delhi High Court saying that it does not interfere with the experts decision and only examines as to whether the decision was on fair grounds.
The petitioner has challenged a decision and a notification issued by the Badminton Association of India (BAI) placing criteria for participation in the selection trials for the Asian Para Games 2023. Justice Subramonium Prasad said decision to not interfere came with a reasoning that the basis for finalising the criteria is only to make sure that players having probability of winning medals in the Asian Para Games are selected. …in matters of selecting the best person to represent the country in the international events, the courts should not interfere with the criteria set out by the experts in the field, Justice Prasad said.
Also Read
It is the petitioner Alphia James’s case that she is a top player and has won gold medals in the National Para Badminton Championship in 2021 and was included in the list of probables to represent the country in the 2023 games, howbeit, the BAI and Paralympic Committee of India (PCI) came up with a fresh criteria making it impossible for several players, especially single wheelchair players, to even get selected for trials.
The high court said that the above mentioned decision by the representatives of the BAI and PCI cannot be faulted with.
The minutes of meeting clearly indicates that the basis of forming the criteria is only to have players having probability of winning medals in the Asian Para Games 2023 cannot be said to be against national interest and as stated above, the basis for finalising the criteria is only to ensure that players having probability of winning medals in the Asian Para Games are selected and, therefore, it does not require any interference,†the court said.
