ORDER: The petitioner, Andhra Pradesh Olympic Association, represented by its General Secretary, R.K.Purushotham (Registration No.569/2016) filed Writ Petition No.46255 of 2018 to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the letters bearing No. IOA/AGM/109/2018/ 2601 dated 22.11.2018 and No.IOA/GO/ANG-153/2505 dated 26.11.2018 as bad, arbitrary, capricious and in deliberate ignorance of the award No.1 of 2017 dated 24.12.2017 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal pursuant to the directions of this Court in W.P.Nos.15255 of 2016 and W.P.No.17965 of 2015 dated 05.09.2017 confirming the affiliation of the petitioner to 2nd respondent, with a consequential direction to the 2nd respondent to communicate all the circulars, letters and events to be conducted by the 2nd respondent to the petitioner. 2. The case of the petitioner in WP.No.46255 of 2018 is that after bifurcation of the State of Andhra Pradesh with effect from 02.06.2014, several writ petitions were filed by the erstwhile Andhra Pradesh Olympic Association claiming an alleged right to represent the State of Andhra Pradesh before Indian Olympic Association (in short IOA) - 2nd respondent ignoring the fact that the 2nd respondent had conducted elections on 04.04.2015 by sending its Observer and by letter dated 07.04.2015 confirmed the affiliation to the petitioner, including the body that was elected in the elections held on 04.04.2015. While so, W.P.Nos.15255 of 2016 and 17965 of 2015 came to be filed before the erstwhile combined High Court challenging the affiliation given by the 2nd respondent in favour of the petitioner and both the writ petitions were disposed of by a common order by a Division Bench of combined High Court of Andhra Pradesh on 05.09.2017 directing the 2nd respondent to constitute a Committee of Arbitrators of retired High Court Judges to examine and decide the issues as to which party is entitled to represent the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh. In pursuance to the direction of this Court, a committee of Arbitrators were appointed comprising of Justice K. Sreedhar Rao, former Acting Chief Justice, Guwahati High Court as the Presiding Arbitrator, while Justice R.B.Misra, former Acting Chief Justice, Himachal Pradesh High Court and Justice V.Jagannatham, former Jude, High Court of Karnataka, as Co-Arbitrators, who entered the reference, upon which the erstwhile A.P.Olympic Association filed its claim statement and the petitioner herein filed its reply statement and thereafter the Arbitral Tribunal passed an Award in Arbitration Case No.1/2017 on 24.12.2017 as follows: “(a) The claimant society/association is not entitled to represent and claim affiliation from the IOA since the election to the claimant society is not held as per the norms and guidelines of the IOA. (b) The affiliation given to the respondent society/association by the IOA is held valid since the elections are held as per the norms and guidelines of the IOA. (c) The 1st prayer in the claim statement is rejected and the counter claim also stands rejected. (d) The respondent is entitled all the costs of this arbitration proceedings and the claimant is directed to reimburse to the respondent all the expenses incurred till date by the respondent. The amounts due to the respondent shall be paid by the claimant within 60 days of this award. (e) This Arbitral Tribunal holds lien over the Award in accordance with Section 39 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 and consequently the award copy is not furnished to either of the parties. (f) The Stamp Duty payable on this Award will be in accordance with law as applicable in the State of Andhra Pradesh. 3. This Court on 25.12.2018 in I.A.No.1/2018 granted the following interim order: “The grievance of the petitioner, in the present Writ Petition, is that, despite an ward passed by a panel of Arbitrators, appointed by the Indian Olympic Association, pursuant to the order of this Court, dated 05.09.2017, in W.P.No.17965 of 2015 and 15255 of 2016, holding that the affiliation given to the petitioner Association is valid, the second respondent herein is holding Annual General Body Meeting on 22.12.2018, pursuant to a letter, dated 22.11.2018 without notice to the petitioner herein. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that, earlier when similar issue cropped up, this Court in W.P.No.20883 of 2018 granted interim direction on 22.6.2018. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that, earlier when similar issue cropped up, this Court in W.P.No.20883 of 2018 granted interim direction on 22.6.2018. A copy of the said order is filed along with the Writ Petition. Having regard to the above, there shall be interim direction as prayed for.” 4. The petitioner, Andhra Pradesh Olympic Association, represented by its General Secretary, Sri K.P. Rao (Registration No.175/1961) filed Writ Petition No.7741 of 2019 to issue a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not passing orders on the application filed on 20.4.2019 seeking approval and to recognize the elected body of the petitioner’s association in the elections conducted on 18.04.2019 as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and contrary to the rules of Indian Olympic Association. 5. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner’s Andhra Pradesh Olympic Association was registered in the year 1961 having Registration No.175/1991 for the combined states and continued till the bifurcation of the State of Andhra Pradesh in the year 2014 and conducted national games in the year 2002 at Hyderabad. After bifurcation of the State in the year 2014 as State of Telangana and State of Andhra Pradesh, the Andhra Pradesh Olympic Association was divided into two Associations as per the Resolution dated 01.03.2015. The assets and cash deposits were apportioned at 58:42 ratio. The Hon’ble Judge Sri D.S.R.Varma supervised the elections and declared two Associations i.e., A.P.Olympic Association registered as 175/1961 and Telangana Olympic Association as per the procedure contemplated. The petitioner’s association is the only one which is recognized and affiliated to the Indian Olympic Association. The terms of the office is for a period of five years and again the elections are to be conducted under the supervision of a retired High Court Judge. However, the petitioner in W.P.No.46255 of 2018 who is a member of the Andhra Pradesh Olympic Association without any authority or sanction under law declared another self styled association, with the same name i.e., the Andhra Pradesh Olympic Association on 12.03.2015 with few members who were also the Members of the petitioner’s association. Immediately, a complaint was lodged with the Indian Olympic Association, which in turn declined to recognize that body. Immediately, a complaint was lodged with the Indian Olympic Association, which in turn declined to recognize that body. In W.P.No.46255 of 2018, a direction was sought to direct the Indian Olympic Association to nominate an election observer for conducting of elections but this Court declined to pass orders and the sane is pending. The petitioners’ association got impleaded as a party respondent but the same was opposed. This Court, however, orally observed giving liberty to the associations to proceed with conducting of elections. The unauthorized registration of the other association in the name of the Andhra Pradesh Olympic Association which got registered in the year 2016 vide No.569 of 2016 was challenged by the petitioners’ association by filing W.P.Nos.17965 of 2015 and 15255 of 2016 before the erstwhile combined High Court and this Court disposed of the said writ petitions with the following directions: “Sri Aditya Singh, learned counsel for the Indian Olympic Association, submits that the Committee would be requested to complete arbitral proceedings, and render their decision at the earliest and in any event within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. We record the submission of Aditya Singh, learned counsel for the Indian Olympic Association, that the I.O.A. would request the Committee of Arbitrators to render their decision early, to avoid uncertainty in the functioning of the Andhra Pradesh Olympic Association, a body entrusted the task of promoting sports in the residuary State of Andhra Pradesh. Till the Committee of Arbitrators take a final decision, the Indian Olympic Association shall ensure that neither of these two bodies operate the bank accounts of the Andhra Pradesh State Olympic Association. Neither of them shall incur any expenditure except with the prior written consent of the Indian Olympic Association.” As per the said decision, the Indian Olympic Association has to constitute a committee of arbitrators and conclude the proceedings at the earliest. But contra, the other association has constituted its own arbitrators and finalized the proceedings without the approval of the IOA which is mandatory as per the orders of this Court and hence, the same was not approved and was rejected by the Executive Committee and General Body of the IOA. But contra, the other association has constituted its own arbitrators and finalized the proceedings without the approval of the IOA which is mandatory as per the orders of this Court and hence, the same was not approved and was rejected by the Executive Committee and General Body of the IOA. Since the earlier body’s tenure is expiring on 18.04.2019, the rival association in order to conduct elections approached this Court by filing W.P.No.4825 of 2019 seeking a direction to the IOA to nominate/depute observer to conduct elections and this court declined to pass orders. However, the petitioner’s association has proceeded with the conduct of elections under the rules and regulations operating the field and pursuant to that, a retired High Court judge Justice C.V.Ramulu was appointed and under his supervision, elections were conducted and declared on 18.04.2019 and the said proceedings were sent for approval of IOA. So far the IOA has not taken any decision, which is arbitrary. Hence, this Writ Petition. 6. In the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the counsel and on perusal of the record, this court found that both the petitioners’ associations are registered associations but failed to mention under which provisions of the Act, these two associations were registered, however, the petitioner in W.P.No.46255 of 2018 was affiliated to the 2nd respondent vide letter dated 07.04.2015 followed by the Award dated 24.12.2017 of the Arbitral Tribunal in Arbitration Case No.1/2017 passed in pursuance of the order dated 5.9.2017 passed in W.P.No.15255 of 2016 and 17965 of 2015 and when the same is in operation, the petitioner in W.P.No.7741 of 2019 having participated in the Arbitral proceedings conducted election on its own on 18.04.2019 under the supervision of a retired High Court Judge Justice C.V.Ramulu and declared the elections. The grievance of the petitioner in W.P.No.7741 of 2019 is that the same is not accepted by the 2nd respondent Association. However, the grievance of the petitioner in W.P.No.46255 of 2018 is that having given recognition and affiliation by the IOA and as the same was recognized by the arbitrators, however, no proceedings are communicated to the petitioner herein. The 2nd respondent failed to communicate letters dated 22.11.2018 and 26.11.2018 intimating the petitioners’ association in W.P.No.46255 of 2018 regarding the various sports events, participation in the General Body Meeting and elections. The 2nd respondent failed to communicate letters dated 22.11.2018 and 26.11.2018 intimating the petitioners’ association in W.P.No.46255 of 2018 regarding the various sports events, participation in the General Body Meeting and elections. The 2nd respondent IOA has its own memorandum and regulations as amended in 2018. As per its Rules and Regulations, all the State Olympic Associations and National Sports Federations have to seek admission by paying necessary fees and also as associate members without any voting rights. The petitioner in W.P.No.7741 of 2019 is the old association called Andhra Pradesh State Olympic Association registered in 1961 is an affiliated member of the 2nd respondent IOA and continued as such and representing in all the matters and the dispute started after bifurcation of the State of Andhra Pradesh in the year 2014 for which as per the provisions State Re-organization Act, the Andhra Pradesh Olympic Association is divided into two (1) Andhra Pradesh Olympic Association with Registration No.175/1961 and (2) Telangana Olympic Association under the supervision of Hon’ble Justice Sri D.S.R.Varma, High Court Judge and elections were also conducted and are continued. Thereafter, when its earlier body’s tenure is expiring on 18.04.2019, elections were conducted under the stewardship of retired High Court Judge Justice C.V.Ramulu on 18.04.2019 and election results were declared. The petitioner’s Association in W.P.No.46255 of 2018 which was recognized association has conducted its elections under the supervision of the 2nd respondent IOA appointed by their Observers and the same was recognized and was allowed to participate in the IOA association. When their participation in the IOA was rejected, Arbitration Committee was constituted and the Arbitration Committee had passed its Award in favour of the petitioner’s association in W.P.No.46255 of 2018 and the said association has filed this Writ Petition to communicate all the letters, circulars and events to be conducted by the 2nd respondent IOA. When their participation in the IOA was rejected, Arbitration Committee was constituted and the Arbitration Committee had passed its Award in favour of the petitioner’s association in W.P.No.46255 of 2018 and the said association has filed this Writ Petition to communicate all the letters, circulars and events to be conducted by the 2nd respondent IOA. Both the petitioners in W.P.No.46255 of 2018 and W.P.No.7741 of 2019 having participated in the Arbitration proceedings in Arbitration Case No.1/2017 dated 24.12.2017 which was held as per the orders dated 05.09.2017 in W.P.No.17965 of 2015 and 15255 of 2016, the petitioner in W.P.No.46255 of 2018 instead of getting the Award executed filed the writ petition and the petitioner in W.P.No.7741 of 2019 instead of challenging the Award seeking to set aside the same, left the Award as it is and without getting their rights resolved as per the Award resorted to approach this Court by filing several writ petitions against each other for recognition and permission to participate and conduct IOA sports and mislead this Court and obtained interim directions and got their activities conducted as per their whims and fancies without following the rules and regulations and the orders passed by this Court. This Court has to deprecate the approach and attitude of both the parties. Both the petitioners are the members of the 2nd respondent-IOA and as per the memorandum of association and regulations, if any dispute arises between the associations and IOA and Members, they have to settle their grievance as per rule 22 of the Memorandum and Rules and Regulations of Indian Olympic Association. Rule 22.1 of the rules reads as under: “All National Sports Federations (subject to regulations and directives of their respective International Federations)/Sate Olympic Associations/Union Territory Olympic Associations/Services Sports Control Board/National Federation of Indian Sport Kho Kho affiliated to I.O.A shall include in their Constitution a provision that the Federations/Associations would have all unresolved disputes settled by the Arbitration Commission of the IOA and their Members shall voluntarily surrender their right of seeking redress in any Court of Law.” As per the above provision, the petitioners have to settle their unresolved disputes before the Arbitration Commission appointed by the IOA and their Members shall have to voluntarily surrender their right of seeking any redress in any Court of Law. Thus, the petitioners have to settle their disputes before the Arbitration Commission appointed by the IOA and have no cause to approach this Court for resolving their disputes. Hence, all the contentions of the petitioners in both the writ petitions have no merit consideration. 7. This Court, in view of the above discussion, found that the Writ Petitions are not maintainable. The Writ Petitions are devoid of merits and are liable to be dismissed and are accordingly, dismissed. No costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.