Tweet
The Supreme Court has strongly decried the misuse of sports clubs and stadia as recreational clubs. The court called for putting the available infrastructure to maximum use for the benefit of sportspersons.
A Bench of Justices R.V. Raveendran and H.L. Gokhale said: “What we find in this case is the common malaise found in various parts of the country in regard to sports stadia and sports facilities. Firstly, inadequate and inappropriate use. Secondly, poor maintenance and thirdly lack of access to students, public, athletes and sportspersons.”
Criticising the manner in which sports bodies were run, the Bench said: “The stadium is meant for improving and developing sports and sportspersons. But slowly and steadily these are ignored by stating that the funds are not available for maintenance or people are not coming to use the facilities. The standard refrain is that a part of the stadia or sports facility can be used for non-sports activities generating funds for the upkeep of the stadium.”
Justice Raveendran, writing the judgment, pointed out that in no time an exclusive recreational club was established for those in power, those who had access to power and those who could afford to pay hefty sums to access the facilities by way of membership.
The Bench said: “Thus valuable state resources meant for the general public, for the poor and the needy who require the facilities to improve themselves, are denied access and the entire facility becomes the domain of a chosen few.”
“Ensure upkeep”
The Bench said: “The State and its instrumentalities should wake up to their responsibilities in regard to the citizens and youth of this country, in regard to human resources development. The country requires world class infrastructure to train potential athletes and sportspersons. It is not sufficient if infrastructure is created, but such infrastructure and facilities should be properly maintained and optimum utilisation of the infrastructure should be ensured.”
The Bench made it clear that a sports complex could not be converted into a recreation club. It said: “Merely because a recreational club has provision for some sports activity like badminton or tennis, it does not become a sports club. Nor can a sports stadium belonging to the government with special infrastructure created for sports, athletes and sportspersons be converted into a recreational club.”
The Bench said: “Development of sports infrastructure does not mean spending hundreds of crores of rupees for infrastructure for some international event and then allowing the entire infrastructure to go waste, but to ensure continuous and effective use of those facilities and provide adequate maintenance and upkeep.”
“Basic sports infrastructure should be made available at village, taluka and district levels and there should be a comprehensive plan for optimum utilisation of the facilities already available so that they are accessible to sportspersons. The government cannot allow sports facilities and sports bodies to be hijacked by persons totally unconnected with sports for private gain or for the benefit of an exclusive few.”
In the instant case, the appellant Krishnan Lal Gera was aggrieved over the misuse of Nahar Singh Stadium at Faridabad in Haryana. His PIL petition in the Punjab and Haryana High Court for certain directions was not considered and he preferred the present appeal. The Supreme Court Bench framed certain issues and remitted the case back to the High Court for fresh disposal.
A Bench of Justices R.V. Raveendran and H.L. Gokhale said: “What we find in this case is the common malaise found in various parts of the country in regard to sports stadia and sports facilities. Firstly, inadequate and inappropriate use. Secondly, poor maintenance and thirdly lack of access to students, public, athletes and sportspersons.”
Criticising the manner in which sports bodies were run, the Bench said: “The stadium is meant for improving and developing sports and sportspersons. But slowly and steadily these are ignored by stating that the funds are not available for maintenance or people are not coming to use the facilities. The standard refrain is that a part of the stadia or sports facility can be used for non-sports activities generating funds for the upkeep of the stadium.”
Justice Raveendran, writing the judgment, pointed out that in no time an exclusive recreational club was established for those in power, those who had access to power and those who could afford to pay hefty sums to access the facilities by way of membership.
The Bench said: “Thus valuable state resources meant for the general public, for the poor and the needy who require the facilities to improve themselves, are denied access and the entire facility becomes the domain of a chosen few.”
“Ensure upkeep”
The Bench said: “The State and its instrumentalities should wake up to their responsibilities in regard to the citizens and youth of this country, in regard to human resources development. The country requires world class infrastructure to train potential athletes and sportspersons. It is not sufficient if infrastructure is created, but such infrastructure and facilities should be properly maintained and optimum utilisation of the infrastructure should be ensured.”
The Bench made it clear that a sports complex could not be converted into a recreation club. It said: “Merely because a recreational club has provision for some sports activity like badminton or tennis, it does not become a sports club. Nor can a sports stadium belonging to the government with special infrastructure created for sports, athletes and sportspersons be converted into a recreational club.”
The Bench said: “Development of sports infrastructure does not mean spending hundreds of crores of rupees for infrastructure for some international event and then allowing the entire infrastructure to go waste, but to ensure continuous and effective use of those facilities and provide adequate maintenance and upkeep.”
“Basic sports infrastructure should be made available at village, taluka and district levels and there should be a comprehensive plan for optimum utilisation of the facilities already available so that they are accessible to sportspersons. The government cannot allow sports facilities and sports bodies to be hijacked by persons totally unconnected with sports for private gain or for the benefit of an exclusive few.”
In the instant case, the appellant Krishnan Lal Gera was aggrieved over the misuse of Nahar Singh Stadium at Faridabad in Haryana. His PIL petition in the Punjab and Haryana High Court for certain directions was not considered and he preferred the present appeal. The Supreme Court Bench framed certain issues and remitted the case back to the High Court for fresh disposal.