JUDGMENT (Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Mandamus as against the respondent, directing the first respondent to declare the election conducted by the fourth respondent to the petitioner Association vide its election notification dated 24.05.2022 as null and void, and forbear the fourth respondent from interfering in the affairs and management of the petitioner association.) This Writ Petition has been filed for a mandamus seeking for a direction to the first respondent to declare the election conducted by the fourth respondent to the petitioner Association, vide election Notification, dated 24.05.2022 as null and void and to forbear the fourth respondent from interfering in the affairs and management of the petitioner Association. 2. The petitioner claims that he is the Secretary of the petitioner Association, who has been duly elected, and his tenure comes to an end on 09.06.2022. According to the petitioner, the fourth respondent, who is the National Body, does not have any power to conduct elections on behalf of the Tamil Nadu Wushu Association. According to the petitioner, the Tamil Nadu Wushu Association has its own by-laws and therefore only in accordance with the said by-laws, the election will have to be conducted. Therefore, the election notification issued by the fourth respondent calling for holding elections for the Tamil Nadu Wushu Association, as per the notification dated 24.05.2022 has to be declared as null and void. 3. At the outset, this Court raised a question to the learned counsel for the petitioner as to how this Writ Petition is maintainable, since the petitioner is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act and will not fall under the definition of State as per Article 12 of the Constitution of India. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of the Hon-ble Supreme Court in the case of Board of Control for Cricket in India and Another vs. Cricket Association of Bihar and Others reported in CDJ 2015 SC 059 and in particular, referred to paragraph No.26 therein and would submit that since the Association is regulated by the Central Government and is getting funds from the Central Government, it is a State falling within the purview of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. He would submit that in the aforesaid decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the decision rendered in Pradeep Kumar Biswas vs. Indian Institute of Chemcial Biology and others reported in (2002) 5 SCC 111 was also followed. He would further submit that when the Board of Control for Cricket in India is also registered under the Societies Registration Act and when the Hon-ble Supreme Court has held it to be a State following Article 12 of the Constitution of India, the fourth respondent Association is on par with the Board of Control for Cricket in India as they have also been registered under the Societies Registration Act and are getting funds from the Government. Therefore, according to him, the present Writ Petition is maintainable. 5. However, Mr.V.Raghavachari, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Mr.R.Venkatesh, learned counsel for the fourth respondent would submit that insofar as the sport of Wushu is concerned, the public at large are not aware of the said sport. He would rely upon the judgment of the Hon-ble Supreme Court in the case of Pradeep Kumar Biswas vs. Indian Institute of Chemical Biology and others in Civil Appeal No.992 of 2002 dated 16.04.2022 and in particular, he would refer to paragraph 12(ii) and submit that the sport of Wushu is not of public importance and not fundamental to the right of the people, hence, the fourth respondent Association cannot be treated as a State for the purpose of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. He would also submit that the petitioner on earlier occasions had approached the Civil Courts to redress his grievances with regard to the functioning of the Association and therefore the present petition is not maintainable. 6. He would also submit that the petitioner has not disclosed the details of the Civil Suits, which were filed by him earlier with regard to the functioning of the petitioner Association. 7. 6. He would also submit that the petitioner has not disclosed the details of the Civil Suits, which were filed by him earlier with regard to the functioning of the petitioner Association. 7. Even though, the learned counsel for the petitioner drew attention of this Court to the alleged misdeeds committed by Mr.Johnson, who has now been elected pursuant to the impugned elections and has also submitted that the fourth respondent Association has no role to play in the conducting of election for the Tamil Nadu Wushu Association, this Court is not expressing its opinion on the merits of the matter, in view of its decision, the present Writ Petition is not maintainable for the following reasons:- a) The petitioner has not disclosed in the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, the details of the suits filed by him against Mr.Johnson and the fourth respondent, though he has stated that earlier civil suits were filed. b) The petitioner having earlier chosen to file civil suits against the fourth respondent Association and having not exercised the writ jurisdiction, necessarily ought to have filed a civil suit to redress his present grievance also. c) The decision relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner in Board of Control for Cricket in India and Another vs. Cricket Association of Bihar and Others reported in CDJ 2015 SC 059 pertains to the sport of Cricket, which is widely played all over India and the entire population of India is keenly interested in the said Sport and has a large public following. The sport of Cricket cannot be equated to the sport of Wushu, which is not commonly played. It is played by very few persons and majority of the Indian population is not aware of the said Sport. d) In the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Board of Control for Cricket in India (referred to supra), it was Cricket centric and did not cover other sports. The question as to whether a sports body falls within the definition of State as per Article 12 of the Constitution of India depends on the functioning and administration of each and every Sport. Mere regulatory control whether under statue or otherwise would not be sufficient. The question as to whether a sports body falls within the definition of State as per Article 12 of the Constitution of India depends on the functioning and administration of each and every Sport. Mere regulatory control whether under statue or otherwise would not be sufficient. e) In the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pradeep Kumar Biswas vs. Indian Institute of Chemcial Biology and others, it was held that for a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act to come within the purview of the Article 12, the said Society must be functionally and administratively under the thumb of the Government. Further, it was held that the function exercised by the Society should be a State activity on account of its public importance and fundamental to the life of the people. However, when compared to the sport of Cricket, the sport of Wushu does not have public importance and does not also have public following to the extent of Cricket and is not fundamental to the life of the people. Therefore, the decision in the case of Board of Control for Cricket in India and Another vs. Cricket Association of Bihar and Others relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner has no applicability to the facts of the instant case. f) The petitioner approaching this Court, ought not to have suppressed all the material facts, including giving details about the earlier suits filed by him against the very same Association though for a different cause of action. Excepting for stating that civil suits were filed earlier, the details of the said civil suits and the relief sought for therein have not been disclosed in the affidavit filed in support of this Writ Petition. Therefore, on the suppression of material facts, this Writ Petition is not maintainable. g) According to the respondents, office bearers have been elected to the Tamil Nadu Wushu Association unopposed, excepting for treasurer. Therefore, on the suppression of material facts, this Writ Petition is not maintainable. g) According to the respondents, office bearers have been elected to the Tamil Nadu Wushu Association unopposed, excepting for treasurer. Even though, at the time of filing of this Writ Petition, office bearers were not elected, but after filing of the Writ Petition, since the officer bearers according to the respondents have been elected, the petitioner ought to have taken steps to implead the office-bearers, who have been elected, as they are necessary parties for effective adjudication of this Writ Petition as they will be aggrieved in case this Court entertains this Writ Petition and passes orders in petitioner-s favour. Having not impleaded the elected office-bearers, which the petitioner claims to be illegal, this Court is of the considered view that this Writ Petition is not maintainable for non joinder of necessary parties. 8. For the foregoing reasons, this Court holds that the present Writ Petition is not maintainable as the only remedy available to the petitioner to redress his grievance is to approach the Civil Court, if aggrieved by the conduct of elections to the Tamil Nadu Wushu Association by the fourth respondent Association. However, this Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter. 9. In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed. However liberty is granted to the petitioner to approach the Civil Court to redress his grievance in the manner known to the petitioner under law. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.