JUDGMENT 1. - Both the writ petitions filed questioning election programme dated 25/08/2011 declared by Returning Officer, Rajasthan Rifles Association, Jaipur (respondent-6), accordingly are disposed of by present order. 2. As alleged, Aklesh Pratap Singh (petitioner) being National Shooter & interested in Rifle Shooting Games whereas Syed Faisal Saeedi claiming to be elected President of District Rifle Shooting Association district Tonk, seeks to interfere regarding the illegalities in the working & election of Rajasthan Rifles Association declared vide programme dated 25/08/2011 impugned herein. 3. However, admittedly (Aklesh Pratap Singh-petitioner is neither a member of a primary sports body nor Office-bearer nor a voter in sports body having right to cast vote in the executive body of a State Level Sports Association (Rajasthan Rifle Association herein) nor eligible to contest the election. Second petition (CW-12240/2011) has been filed by so-called Distt. Rifle Shooting Association, Tonk, of which Syed Faisal Saeedi claims to be elected President; but the fact is that it is neither affiliated unit nor registered District Level Association under provisions of Rajasthan Sports (Registration, Recognition & Regulation of Associations) Act, 2005 ("Sports Act, 2005") and as per Section 14(3) affiliated District Level Sports Association has a right to cast vote on behalf of that District for the election of Executive body of State Level Sports Association. 4. It is also not the case of the petitioner Association that any application has been submitted by so called District Level Rifle Association seeking affiliation/registration with the State level Association. U/s 5(2) of the Act, 2005, a district level sports association could apply for registration after its affiliating State Level Sports Association has received the certificate of registration and such of District Level Sports Association which are affiliated, along are eligible to cast one vote on behalf of their district level Association provided U/s 14(3) of the Act. 5. Counsel for petitioners jointly submit that respondent-5 (Sushil Kumar Choudhary) is neither a member of the Primary sports Body nor a member or Office-bearer of District or State Level association, as such declaration of election programme of Raj. Rifle Association dated 25/08/2011 at his behest is unwarranted and such election schedule deserves to be quashed & set aside. 6. 5. Counsel for petitioners jointly submit that respondent-5 (Sushil Kumar Choudhary) is neither a member of the Primary sports Body nor a member or Office-bearer of District or State Level association, as such declaration of election programme of Raj. Rifle Association dated 25/08/2011 at his behest is unwarranted and such election schedule deserves to be quashed & set aside. 6. Reply to the writ petition has been filed by respondent-5 (caveator) raising preliminary objections inter-alia that apart from Rajasthan Rifle Association being necessary party to the writ petitions in absence whereof, these petitions are not maintainable; further objection raised is that the challenge has been made to the validity of election schedule of Rajasthan Rifle Association, which is a registered State level Sports Association, and is controlled & governed by Sports Act, 2005 under which all such election disputes, if any having arisen, can be settled by invoking Section 16 through Conciliation & Arbitration and that being so, judicial intervention is barred. 7. Further objection raised is that under the Sports Act, 2005, only such District level Association can cast one vote which are affiliated with State level Sports Association; and only 12 District level sports associations are affiliated and are holding voting rights in the elections of State Level Sports association and the petitioners being neither members of Primary or District Level Sports Association nor Office-bearer of District level Association, are eligible to participate in the election of State level Sports Association and such election schedule of State Level Association cannot be questioned and have no locus standi to raise election dispute. 8. This Court finds substance in preliminary objections raised by Counsel for respondents. Admittedly both the petitioners are neither members of primary or District Level Association duly affiliated with State Level Sports Association nor holding voting rights in the elections being held by State Level Sports Association and this fact has not been controverted that the alleged district level association is neither affiliated nor registered with State Level Sports Association and that being so, either of the petitioners are not eligible to participate in the election schedule in question in absence whereof, both the petitioners have no locus standi to question the election schedule declared by State Level Sports Association. 9. That apart, this Court finds substance in the preliminary objection further raised by respondent's Counsel in regard to election dispute. 9. That apart, this Court finds substance in the preliminary objection further raised by respondent's Counsel in regard to election dispute. Chapter III of Sports Act, 2005 deals with elections of the Executive body of a Sports Association and as provided U/s 14 of Chapter III of Sports Act, 2005, such of the election disputes can be settled only in terms of the mandate provided U/s 16 of Sports Act, 2005 through conciliation & arbitration in terms of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. 10. In the light of what has been observed (supra), in the considered opinion of this Court, both the petitioners are not having locus standi to question election schedule declared by Election Officer (respondent-6). Consequently both the writ petitions being devoid of merit, fail and are hereby dismissed. No costs.Writ petitions dismissed. *******