ORDER : 1. Petitioners filed this Writ Petition invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, being aggrieved by the alleged inaction of the 2nd Respondent - Indian Weightlifting Federation (hereinafter "the Federation" or "IWLF"), in not acting upon the representation dated 08.01.2024 submitted by the 1 st Petitioner, the then President of the Telangana Weightlifting Association (hereinafter "TWLA"), requesting the Federation to depute an Observer for supervising elections to the Executive Committee of the Telangana Weightlifting Association for the tenure 2024-2028. Petitioners also seek a consequential direction to the said Returning Officer, Sri P. Vijender, District & Sessions Judge (Retd.), appointed by the 1 st Petitioner to conduct the said elections. 2. Telangana Weightlifting Association was registered under No. 834/2014 on 19.12.2015 and has been the recognized State Unit affiliated to Indian Weightlifting Federation since that date. The tenure of its Executive Committee expired on 30.07.2023. To ensure continuity and adherence to the Association's registered bye-laws, the then President addressed successive representations to Federation on 26.07.2023, 02.08.2023, 04.09.2023, 10.09.2023 and 24.09.2023 requesting permission to conduct elections and to appoint an Observer. Petitioners state that as there was no response, they issued the notice dated 08.01.2024 fixing elections for 28.01.2024 at Hyderabad and appointed Sri P. Vijender (Retd.) as Returning Officer, as permitted by the Association's bye-laws. Petitioners allege that instead of acting upon the said representation or deputing an Observer, the Federation arbitrarily appointed an Ad-hoc Committee for Telangana by proceedings dated 15.01.2024, later extending its tenure on 13.04.2024. 2.1. Petitioners contend that appointment of Ad-hoc Committee is contrary to Article XVII (4)(1) and (2) of the Federation's Constitution. They state that the said provision authorizes such appointment only when a State Unit is disaffiliated by a resolution of the General Council passed by two-third majority, which never occurred in the present case. No show-cause notice, enquiry or opportunity was given to the Telangana Association. It is their case that Federation's action amounts to unilateral supersession of an elected body, arbitrary interference with the Association's autonomy and violation of the principles of natural justice and fair play. 2.2. Petitioners also assert that the Ad-hoc Committee comprised mainly of outsiders, has no legal standing under the Association's bye-laws. It is their case that Federation's action amounts to unilateral supersession of an elected body, arbitrary interference with the Association's autonomy and violation of the principles of natural justice and fair play. 2.2. Petitioners also assert that the Ad-hoc Committee comprised mainly of outsiders, has no legal standing under the Association's bye-laws. They allege that the Committee's issuance of Letter No. Ad-hoc/SGM/01 dated 01.05.2024 calling for a Special General Body Meeting to be held on 06.06.2024 for elections, was illegal and that the Election Notification dated 03.05.2024 deleting Petitioners’ names from the Electoral College, without service of notice or opportunity, violates Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution. They state that the National Sports Development Code of 2011 relied upon by Respondents is inapplicable to a State Association governed by its own registered bye-laws. 2.3. It is further pleaded that Federation's failure to depute an Observer pursuant to the representation dated 08.01.2024 stalled the democratic process and that the subsequent steps taken by the Ad-hoc Committee were designed to exclude legitimate members and include newly created, ineligible district units. Petitioners accordingly pray that the Ad- hoc Committee's appointment and all subsequent actions be declared illegal and that elections be directed to be held under the supervision of the already appointed Returning Officer. 3. Respondents, on the other hand, filed detailed counter affidavits traversing each of the allegations made in the Writ Petition and stoutly denying the contentions raised by Petitioners. It is contended that Petitioners have not approached this Court with clean hands and have suppressed vital facts pertaining to dissolution of the Telangana Weightlifting Association's Executive Committee, constitution of Ad-hoc Committee and their own participation in Federation's proceedings. It is asserted that Petitioners' attempt to portray themselves as lawful Executive Committee is wholly untenable and contrary to record. 3.1. Respondents state that Executive Committee of Telangana Weightlifting Association was dissolved by the General Council of Indian Weightlifting Federation through unanimous resolutions passed in its Annual General Meetings held on 21.03.2022 and 29.12.2023. These meetings, it is stated, were attended by representatives of all affiliated State Units, including Telangana and were conducted in full compliance with Federation's Constitution. Respondents refer to copies of Resolutions annexed as Annexures R-6 and R-19, which record the decision to dissolve Telangana Executive Committee due to prolonged inaction, non-conduct of elections after expiry of tenure and continued administrative lapses. Respondents refer to copies of Resolutions annexed as Annexures R-6 and R-19, which record the decision to dissolve Telangana Executive Committee due to prolonged inaction, non-conduct of elections after expiry of tenure and continued administrative lapses. Respondents thus contend that Petitioners' assertion that they continued to function as a validly-elected body is factually-incorrect and legally-unsustainable. 3.2. It is the categorical contention of Respondents that, after such dissolution, Petitioners were divested of all authority to represent or act on behalf of Telangana Weightlifting Association. Therefore, issuance of the notice dated 08.01.2024 by the 1st Petitioner calling for elections and appointment of Sri P. Vijender, District & Sessions Judge (Retd.) as Returning Officer were acts performed without jurisdiction and contrary to Federation's Constitution. Respondents specifically deny that Federation was under any obligation to act upon the representation dated 08.01.2024, as the very foundation of that representation stood vitiated by dissolution of Committee itself. 3.3. Respondents further state that, consequent on dissolution of the Executive Committee, the President of the Federation, in exercise of the powers conferred under Article XVII(4)(1) of its Constitution, appointed an Ad-hoc Committee for Telangana through proceedings dated 15.01.2024 to administer the affairs of the dissolved State Unit and to facilitate fresh elections. It is submitted that the said Article empowers the President to take such measures to ensure continuity of administration in dissolved units and there is no requirement of prior approval of the General Council for constitution of such a temporary committee. Respondents deny Petitioners' claim that appointment of Ad-hoc Committee was unilateral or mala fide, stating that the said decision was taken after due consultation with senior members of the Federation and upon examination of the State Association's records. 3.4. Respondents further assert that composition of Ad-hoc Committee was balanced, transparent and representative. Two members were taken from Telangana itself and one was nominated from Telangana Olympic Association to ensure local participation and neutrality. Later, by communication dated 15.04.2024, Mr. Nirlep Singh, General Secretary of the Uttar Pradesh Weightlifting Association, was inducted as the fifth member to strengthen the Committee's administrative capacity. Respondents deny Petitioners' allegation that the Committee was composed of outsiders, clarifying that its membership structure was designed to ensure impartial oversight and fair conduct of elections. 3.5. Later, by communication dated 15.04.2024, Mr. Nirlep Singh, General Secretary of the Uttar Pradesh Weightlifting Association, was inducted as the fifth member to strengthen the Committee's administrative capacity. Respondents deny Petitioners' allegation that the Committee was composed of outsiders, clarifying that its membership structure was designed to ensure impartial oversight and fair conduct of elections. 3.5. It is further stated that Federation had placed on record the letter dated 23.01.2024 written by the 1 st Petitioner himself to the President of the IWLF, acknowledging constitution of Ad-hoc Committee and expressly stating that he had stopped election process initiated through notice dated 08.01.2024, leaving the matter to the Federation for further action. Respondents contend that this document completely demolishes Petitioners case, as it proves that they accepted dissolution and acquiesced to Federation's decision to constitute an Ad-hoc Committee. Petitioners' present plea that Committee was illegally-constituted, according to Respondents, is an afterthought and contrary to their own prior communication. 3.6. Respondents further point out that, in compliance with this Court's interim order dated 03.05.2024, the Returning Officer, Sri P. Vijender, District & Sessions Judge (Retd.), issued the notice dated 23.05.2024 calling upon all the concerned parties to appear before him on 01.06.2024 at Hyderabad. After hearing the parties and examining the documents, he passed a speaking order dated 05.06.2024 categorically holding that he could not proceed with the election as the Executive Committee of the TWLA had already been dissolved and his appointment was without jurisdiction. Respondents therefore, contend that Petitioners' principal relief seeking a direction to the said Returning Officer to conduct elections has become infructuous in the light of this categorical finding. 3.7. Respondents also deny Petitioners' assertion that notice for Special General Body Meeting dated 01.05.2024 and Election Notification dated 03.05.2024 were not duly served on them. It is contended that these notices were displayed on the notice board of Ad-hoc Committee's camp office at Hyderabad, communicated to all the affiliated district units by e-mail and telephonic communication and orally conveyed to their representatives. Respondents further submit that Petitioners' names were not included in Electoral College finalized on 28.04.2024, as their respective district associations failed to furnish valid registration certificates despite repeated reminders dated 13.04.2024, 23.04.2024, and 27.04.2024. The minutes of the Ad-hoc Committee meeting dated 28.04.2024, record the reasons for exclusion of ineligible district units, including those represented by Petitioners. Respondents further submit that Petitioners' names were not included in Electoral College finalized on 28.04.2024, as their respective district associations failed to furnish valid registration certificates despite repeated reminders dated 13.04.2024, 23.04.2024, and 27.04.2024. The minutes of the Ad-hoc Committee meeting dated 28.04.2024, record the reasons for exclusion of ineligible district units, including those represented by Petitioners. Respondents assert that preparation of Electoral College was done in a transparent manner and that Petitioners' exclusion was purely due to their own non-compliance. 3.8. Respondents categorically deny that elections held on 06.06.2024 were pre-determined or manipulated. They submit that elections were conducted strictly in accordance with the guidelines and directions of the Indian Weightlifting Federation and the National Sports Development Code, 2011. Polling was held in the presence of an Observer appointed by the Federation, and results were duly declared and ratified by letter dated 10.06.2024. Respondents therefore, contend that Petitioners grievance has become infructuous as the election process has been concluded and the new office bearers have assumed charge. Respondents also reject Petitioners' contention that the National Sports Development Code, 2011, is inapplicable to State Associations. They state that Telangana Weightlifting Association, being an affiliated State Unit of the Indian Weightlifting Federation, is bound by the Federation's Constitution and by the mandatory compliance requirements prescribed under the Sports Code. They point out that Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, by its circulars and letters, has directed all National Federations to ensure that their State and District affiliates follow the Sports Code in letter and spirit. Hence, Federation's supervisory powers over its State Unit are neither excessive nor illegal. 3.9. Finally, Respondents contend that Petitioners' approach to this Court is tainted by suppression, misrepresentation, and lack of bona fides. They state that Petitioners, having accepted the Ad-hoc Committee's formation in January 2024 and having failed to challenge the same for several months, cannot now turn around to assail the legality of elections conducted under due supervision. They argue that Writ Petition is an afterthought intended to disturb a duly- elected body and to re-assert control over the Association through judicial process. Accordingly, they pray that this Court may dismiss the Writ Petition as being devoid of merit, infructuous and abuse of process of law. 4. They argue that Writ Petition is an afterthought intended to disturb a duly- elected body and to re-assert control over the Association through judicial process. Accordingly, they pray that this Court may dismiss the Writ Petition as being devoid of merit, infructuous and abuse of process of law. 4. In reply to the counter affidavits filed by Respondents, Petitioners filed detailed rejoinders denying the allegations made therein and reiterating all the averments contained in the Writ Petition. Petitioners contend that Federation's claim regarding dissolution of Executive Committee of the Telangana Weightlifting Association in the Annual General Meetings held on 21.03.2022 and 29.12.2023 is wholly unfounded. They assert that no notice, agenda, or communication of such meetings was ever served on the Telangana Association, nor were they informed that any proposal for dissolution of the Executive Committee was to be placed before the General Council. It is further submitted that the minutes and resolutions relied upon by the Federation were never circulated to the State Units, and therefore, the Respondents' reliance on such resolutions is misleading and fabricated for the purpose of this litigation. 4.1. Petitioners also categorically deny that they participated in the said meetings or consented to any such resolution. According to them, the requirement of two-third majority of the General Council, as mandated under Article XVII(4)(1) and (2) of the Federation's Constitution, was not satisfied, and even assuming that any meeting was held, the proceedings are void ab initio for want of notice, quorum, and procedure. They therefore, assert that the Executive Committee of the Telangana Weightlifting Association was never legally-dissolved and continued to function as a valid body under its registered bye-laws. 4.2. Petitioners further state that the Federation has deliberately misinterpreted the letter dated 23.01.2024 issued by the 1 st Petitioner. They contend that the said communication was made under protest and without prejudice to their rights, with the limited objective of safeguarding participation of Telangana athletes in national events. They deny that the said letter amounts to acquiescence or recognition of Ad-hoc Committee, as alleged by the Federation. On the contrary, it is stated that immediately after the said communication, Petitioners protested against the arbitrary constitution of the Ad-hoc Committee and demanded its withdrawal. Respondents' selective reliance on that letter, while ignoring subsequent correspondence, demonstrates mala fide intent. 4.3. They deny that the said letter amounts to acquiescence or recognition of Ad-hoc Committee, as alleged by the Federation. On the contrary, it is stated that immediately after the said communication, Petitioners protested against the arbitrary constitution of the Ad-hoc Committee and demanded its withdrawal. Respondents' selective reliance on that letter, while ignoring subsequent correspondence, demonstrates mala fide intent. 4.3. Petitioners also deny Respondents' allegation that they failed to produce valid registration certificates of their respective district associations. It is asserted that all the relevant documents, including registration certificates, were submitted to the Federation through official correspondence and were also furnished to the Ad-hoc Committee during its initial interactions in February and March 2024. Petitioners contend that Ad-hoc Committee deliberately ignored those submissions to eliminate genuine district associations from the Electoral College and to include newly created, non-existent, and favoured entities. Such conduct, it is contended, vitiates the entire election process subsequently held on 06.06.2024. 4.4. Petitioners further assert that the so-called notice dated 01.05.2024 calling for Special General Body Meeting was never served on them or their affiliated district associations. According to Petitioners, no physical or postal intimation was ever issued. Instead, a Whats App message was circulated only on 02.06.2024 barely four days prior to the scheduled meeting- making it impossible for them to attend or object to the proceedings. They submit that such communication through social media, without any contemporaneous official notice, cannot constitute valid service in law. Petitioners further contend that the Electoral College prepared by the Ad-hoc Committee excluded all genuine and long-standing district units, including those of Petitioners and included only handpicked associations loyal to the Ad-hoc Committee, thereby rendering the entire election exercise a farce. 4.5. It is also the case of Petitioners that the Federation has failed to establish that the President had any independent authority to constitute an Ad-hoc Committee in the absence of a valid resolution by the General Council. They assert that Article XVII(4) of the Federation's Constitution does not empower the President to unilaterally dissolve an elected body or to constitute a substitute body without the approval of the General Council. Petitioners therefore, state that Ad-hoc Committee formed through the President's proceedings dated 15.01.2024, and its subsequent extension on 13.04.2024, are illegal, without jurisdiction, and null and void in the eyes of law. Petitioners therefore, state that Ad-hoc Committee formed through the President's proceedings dated 15.01.2024, and its subsequent extension on 13.04.2024, are illegal, without jurisdiction, and null and void in the eyes of law. Petitioners also deny the Respondents' assertion that elections conducted on 06.06.2024 were held in a fair and transparent manner. They state that the said elections were conducted behind closed doors, without giving any opportunity to them or their district units to participate or file objections. It is submitted that Election Notification dated 03.05.2024 was not published in any manner known to law and was neither circulated nor displayed publicly. The entire process, according to Petitioners, was pre- determined to install a body favourable to the Federation and to justify the actions of the Ad-hoc Committee. 4.6. Petitioners finally contend that Federation's reliance on the National Sports Development Code of 2011 is misplaced and misconceived. They submit that the Code, being a policy guideline applicable to recognized national sports federations, does not have overriding effect upon a State-level Association registered under the Telangana Societies Registration Act, 2001. The Telangana Weightlifting Association, being a separate legal entity, is governed by its own bye-laws and not by any administrative directions issued by the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports. Therefore, the Federation's attempt to impose the Sports Code on a State Association amount to overreach and is contrary to settled principles of law governing independent associations. Petitioners thus reiterate that entire counter affidavits filed by Respondents are based on false, misleading, and self-serving averments. They maintain that the Federation acted in a partisan and arbitrary manner by constituting an Ad-hoc Committee without authority, by excluding legitimate members from the Electoral College, and by holding sham elections to install its favoured nominees. The Petitioners, therefore, submit that the dissolution of the Executive Committee, the appointment of the Ad-hoc Committee, and the entire election process culminating in the results dated 10.06.2024 are illegal, void, and violative of the principles of natural justice and fair play. 5. Heard Sri N. Gangadhar, learned counsel for petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Sports. 6. Having considered the entire record, this Court finds that the sequence of events and documents clearly establish that the Executive Committee of the Telangana Weightlifting Association stood dissolved by resolutions of the Federation's General Council dated 21.03.2022 and 29.12.2023. 5. Heard Sri N. Gangadhar, learned counsel for petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Sports. 6. Having considered the entire record, this Court finds that the sequence of events and documents clearly establish that the Executive Committee of the Telangana Weightlifting Association stood dissolved by resolutions of the Federation's General Council dated 21.03.2022 and 29.12.2023. The 1 st Petitioner's letter dated 23.01.2024 explicitly acknowledges formation of Ad-hoc Committee and withdrawal of election process initiated by him. Petitioners' assertion that they were unaware of these decisions is untenable. Their participation in Federation meetings and subsequent silence amounts to acquiescence. The order dated 05.06.2024 passed by Sri P. Vijender (Retd.) confirms that he refused to act as Returning Officer, holding his appointment invalid after dissolution of the Executive Committee. Once the Returning Officer himself declined jurisdiction, no subsisting direction can be issued to compel him. The subsequent elections conducted on 06.06.2024 under the supervision of the Ad-hoc Committee and in the presence of the Federation's Observer have already been completed and recognized on 10.06.2024. 7. This Court is satisfied that the Federation acted within its constitutional powers under Article XVII (4)(1) in constituting an Ad-hoc Committee. The said provision expressly enables the Federation to appoint such a committee when a State Unit's Executive Committee is dissolved, to ensure continuity and to conduct elections. The contention that Article XVII (4)(2) was violated is misconceived, as that clause applies only to disaffiliation, which never occurred. The Telangana Association's affiliation remained intact, and its athletes continued to participate in national competitions even during the interregnum. This Court also finds no substance in the plea that the National Sports Code is inapplicable to State Associations. Once affiliated to the Indian Weightlifting Federation, the Telangana Association and its District Units are bound by the Federation's Constitution, circulars, and directions issued pursuant to the National Sports Development Code 2011. The Federation's supervisory role necessarily extends to ensuring compliance by its State Units. 8. The conduct of Petitioners in suppressing the resolutions of 2022 and 2023 and in withholding the fact of their own letter dated 23.01.2024 demonstrates lack of candor. Equitable jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be invoked by a party who conceals material facts and simultaneously challenges a process in which it has participated. 8. The conduct of Petitioners in suppressing the resolutions of 2022 and 2023 and in withholding the fact of their own letter dated 23.01.2024 demonstrates lack of candor. Equitable jurisdiction under Article 226 cannot be invoked by a party who conceals material facts and simultaneously challenges a process in which it has participated. Petitioners, having themselves attended meetings of the Federation where these matters were discussed and having accepted the Ad-hoc Committee's existence for months, cannot now approbate and reprobate. The reasons advanced by the Federation for constituting Ad-hoc Committee are rational and consistent with its constitutional framework. The Committee's actions, including issuance of notice dated 01.05.2024, verification of eligible district units and conduct of elections on 06.06.2024 in the presence of an Observer, do not exhibit any illegality or procedural irregularity. Petitioners' non-inclusion in Electoral College arose solely because they failed to submit valid registration certificates despite repeated opportunities. 9. Considering the entire factual background, this Court holds that Petitioners have not demonstrated any arbitrariness, mala fide, or violation of statutory provisions on the part of Respondents. The Federation's decisions were taken in the interest of maintaining transparency and good governance of the sport, ensuring adherence to recognized national norms. Petitioners, on the other hand, by suppressing material facts, failing to cooperate in the verification process, and later challenging the very process they acquiesced in, have disentitled themselves to equitable relief. 10. For all these reasons, this Court concludes that Petitioners failed to make out any ground for interference. The Federation's appointment of the Ad-hoc Committee on 15.01.2024, its extension on 13.04.2024, notice dated 01.05.2024 for the Special General Body Meeting and the elections held on 06.06.2024 are all found to be valid and in accordance with law. Petitioners' prayer for a direction to Returning Officer to conduct elections pursuant to the letter dated 08.01.2024 is infructuous and unsustainable in view of the speaking order dated 05.06.2024 and completion of the election process. 11. The Writ Petition is therefore, liable to be dismissed as devoid of merit. Petitioners failed to approach this Court with clean hands, suppressed material facts and sought to challenge actions in which they themselves acquiesced. This Court therefore declines to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 12. The Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. 13. Consequently, miscellaneous Applications, if any shall stand closed.