ORDER : Petitioner is a budding cricketer aged about 22 and is residing in Hyderabad. He approached this Court to declare the notification dated 07.11.2023 issued by the 3 rd respondent based on the resolution made during the first Apex Council meeting, introducing the minimum of 5 years of domicile within the state of Telangana (Team Hyderabad) for all age group categories, for selection into the State Team, as violation of fundamental right, especially under Article 14 & 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India. It is the case of petitioner that he born in Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh and later moved to Hyderabad, Telangana in the end of 2017. He is passionate about cricket and is actively pursuing the sport. In 2018, he started playing league matches in various categories and tournaments in Hyderabad. In 2019, he scored over 1800 runs in the HCA season, which included three double hundreds. Based on this performance, he was selected for Hyderabad Under-19 team for Vinoo Mankad and Cooch Behar Trophies. In 2021, he was selected as a probable for Under-25 team and in 2023, he was one of the top scorers and was selected for Hyderabad Under-23 One Day Team. The assertions about the performance of petitioner in the matches were not disputed by the 2 nd respondent -Association. While the matter stood thus, on 07.11.2023, a formal notification/order was issued by the 3rd respondent - President of the 2nd respondent to the effect that “In accordance with the resolution made during the 1st Apex Council Meeting, pertaining to the domicile criteria for eligibility to represented the State of Telangana (Team Hyderabad) in all age group categories for both men and women, it mandates that a player must demonstrate a minimum of 5-years of domicile within the state of Telangana to qualify the selection". The said order is impugned in this Writ Petition. 2. Sri P. Raja Sripathi Rao, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri Aditya Vyas, counsel for petitioner submits that the 3 rd respondent does not have the power, authority and jurisdiction to pass the impugned order under the bye-laws/Rules and Regulations of the 2 nd respondent Association. As per bye-laws/Rules and Regulations of the Association, the Apex Council is to take decision with regard to implementation of domicile criteria and not the President of the Association. As per bye-laws/Rules and Regulations of the Association, the Apex Council is to take decision with regard to implementation of domicile criteria and not the President of the Association. It is submitted that in the impugned order, reference is made with regard to the resolution that is purported to have been passed in the 1 st Apex Council Meeting to the effect of introducing the domicile criteria. The 1 st Apex Council Meeting was held on 25.10.2023 and on perusal of the Minutes of the Meeting, there is no such agenda and decision that was taken for introduction and implementation of the domicile criteria as mentioned in the mentioned in the impugned order. According to learned Senior Counsel, the 2 nd respondent constituted a Three-Member Committee to look into the cricketing operations, to oversee fairness and selection of various cricket teams of Hyderabad, men and women in all categories by the selectors for 2023-24; after considering the bye-laws/Rules and Regulations of the Association, the Three- Member Committee had observed as hereunder: - DOMICILE REQUIREMENTS: Many outstation players and those settled in Hyderabad or anywhere in Telangana State are being given opportunities without any specified criteria to represent. The Hyderabad Cricket Association teams in various levels. Many parents and players and others are not appreciating this as the hardworking cricketers as players of Telangana are losing their opportunities. Since, migration of cricketers all over the country happen in all associations. There is a need to frame certain conditions for cricketers born in other states to represent our state teams. 3. The 2 nd respondent filed its counter contending that the selection committee is having exclusive authority to select Hyderabad Cricket Team from cricketers from the State of Telangana and that the 2nd respondent is functioning under the aegis of Board of Control for cricket in India (BCCI). As per Rules 16 to 18 of the bye-laws/Rules and Regulations, the 2 nd respondent Association will have concurrent jurisdiction and control over the players within the jurisdiction of the member. As per Rules 16 to 18 of the bye-laws/Rules and Regulations, the 2 nd respondent Association will have concurrent jurisdiction and control over the players within the jurisdiction of the member. According to Regulation No.20, on the directive of Hon’ble Sri Justice P. Naveen Rao (Retd.) to follow the guidelines laid down by the Single Member Committee, the 4th Respondent issued notification for conducting Al division League 2024-25 of Syed Mushtaq Ali T20 Tournament, a T20 League-cum-Knock-Out Tournament for Al Division League which commenced on 07-11-2024 and on other various terms and conditions, including one of the term regulating the eligibility of the player with domicile proof for the last five years, if not born in Telangana but residing in Telangana, and that Justice Naveen Rao gave the directive reducing the domicile requirement from 5 to 3 years. Accordingly, an amended notification dated 05.11.2024 was issued. It is also stated, as per the petitioner’s Aadhar updated history, his domicile status in Telangana is from 05.08.2023 and is yet to complete three years of making the eligibility requirements and that he would be eligible after 04.08.2026. It is denied by the 2nd respondent at para 14 that petitioner is residing in the State of Telangana for the last 5 years and that he has been regularly participating in the local tournaments as well as representing Hyderabad in BCCI Tournaments. 4. Heard Sri Ashok Anand Kumar, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri T.Gangadhar, counsel for Respondents 2 to 6 and Assistant Govt Pleader for the 1st respondent. 5. Before considering the rival pleas, this Court feels it just and necessary to take into consideration the bye- laws/Rules and Regulations of the 2 nd respondent Association, which were referred to infra. 6. An important aspect that is raised by petitioner is that the 3 rd respondent does not have the authority and jurisdiction to issue the impugned order. To decide this aspect, bye-laws/Rules and Regulations No.7 is relevant and the same is extracted hereunder:- “7. POWER AND DUTIES OF OFFICE BEARERS: - 7.1 The President (a) The President shall preside at all meetings of the General Body and the Apex Council. (b) The President shall be one of the three persons who sign the audited annual accounts and other financial statements of the HCA. POWER AND DUTIES OF OFFICE BEARERS: - 7.1 The President (a) The President shall preside at all meetings of the General Body and the Apex Council. (b) The President shall be one of the three persons who sign the audited annual accounts and other financial statements of the HCA. (c) The President shall also exercise such functions and duties as he may be empowered with by the General Body or the Apex Council. (d) The President shall, in the event of a vacancy or indisposition of an Office Bearer, delegate the functions to another Office Bearer until the Vacancy is Duly filled up, or the indisposition ceases.” 7. From the language and intent of the bye- laws/Rules and Regulation No.7.1, there is no such power or authority conferred on the President of the 2 nd respondent Association to issue any orders independently and solely at his discretion expect when the powers are specifically conferred to him in the General Body or by the Apex Council. In the instant case, though in the impugned order there is reference to Apex Council meeting and a decision is purported to have taken in the said meeting for introduction/implementation of the Domicile Criteria, on perusal of the said minutes of the meetings, there is no such resolution that was passed in the meeting. On the face of the record and so also the pleadings of the respective parties, this Court does not find any such power conferred on the 3rd respondent to pass the impugned order. 8. Rule No. 15 of Respondent No.2 of Rules and Regulations extract here under: - “15. POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF APEX COUNCIL. I. The affairs of the HCA shall be governed by the Apex Council and its framework of governance shall: (i) Enable strategic guidance of the entity: ii. Ensure efficient monitoring of management: iii. Ensure the performance of the respective roles, responsibilities and powers of the CEO, Managers, Cricket Committees and Standing Committees, except the Governing Council, and iv. Ensure a distribution and balance of authority so that no single individual has unfettered powers. 2. The Apex Council shall have all the powers of the General Body and authority and discretion to do all acts and things except such acts as by these rules are expressly directed or required to be done by the General Body. Ensure a distribution and balance of authority so that no single individual has unfettered powers. 2. The Apex Council shall have all the powers of the General Body and authority and discretion to do all acts and things except such acts as by these rules are expressly directed or required to be done by the General Body. Exercise of such powers, authorities and discretion shall be subject to the control and regulation of the General Body. No regulation shall retrospectively invalidate any act of the Apex Council which was otherwise valid. 3. The Apex Council shall exercise superintendence over the CEO, the Cricket Committees, and the Standing Committees in the discharge of their duties generally, and in particular, in accordance with any general or special direction of the General Body, except for the Governing Council of the TIL which is directly accountable to the General Body 4. In addition to and without prejudice to the generality of powers conferred directly or by necessary implication under these Rules and regulations and the Memorandum of Association, the Apex Council shall exercise the powers and perform the duties here after mentioned: a. To control, permit and regulate all aspects regarding the visits of domestic cricket teams to Telangana and visits of HCA teams to other states and to settle the terms on which such visits shall be conducted b. To lay down conditions on which Players shall take part in a tour to any place and by which such Players shall be governed, including terms of payments to such Players. c. To control, expand and regulate the finances of the HCA. d. To institute or defend any action or proceedings for or against the HCA or against any Office-Bearer or employee of the H??. e. To mediate regarding issues between Members, failing resolution of which a reference may be made to the Ombudsman. f. To interact and consult with the Cricket Players' Association regarding representations made on their behalf. g. To purchase, sell and/or mortgage, exchange and/or otherwise dispose of immovable property wherever situated, in order to promote the objects of the H??. h. To collect funds and whenever necessary borrow not exceeding 25% of the General Fund with or without security for purposes of the HCA and to raise loans with or without security and to purchase, redeem or payoff any such security. h. To collect funds and whenever necessary borrow not exceeding 25% of the General Fund with or without security for purposes of the HCA and to raise loans with or without security and to purchase, redeem or payoff any such security. i. To fill up, till the following Annual General Meeting, any vacancy occurring of a member of a committee by reason of death or being adjudged insolvent or being of unsound mind or being convicted of a criminal offence involving moral turpitude or by resignation or any other disqualification. j. To frame rules and lay down conditions including those of travel, accommodation and allowances under which Players shall take part in cricket tournaments/matches or Exhibition, Festival and Charity matches organized by the HCA or by a Member under the authority of the HCA in the course of a visit or tour of any cricket team to Telangana. k. To frame rules for the State Championship of Telangana for the Inter-District matches or for University, Schools, or other tournaments or for any Exhibition matches between members and lor between the Universities/other institutions/corporates/others in the state. l. To frame rules regarding the appointment, service conditions and disciplinary action concerning employees and officers of the HCA. m. To make the Tournament Rules for various domestic tournaments and exhibition matches involving Members, Universities / Schools /Colleges and other entities. n. To frame, in consultation with the CEO, rules for the appointment of Managers, Secretaries, Administrative Officers, Peons and other service personnel and staff and for payment to them and other persons in return for their services rendered to the HCA, salaries, wages, gratuities, pensions, honorariums, compensations, any ex- gratia payment and/or provident fund and to regulate discipline by suspending, fining, removing, or dismissing such employees. o. To make rules generally for the management of the affairs of the HCA. p. To start or sponsor and/or to subscribe to funds or stage a match for the benefit of cricketers or persons who may have rendered service to the game of cricket or for their families or to donate for the development or promotion of the game to be regulated by rules framed in this regard from time to time. p. To start or sponsor and/or to subscribe to funds or stage a match for the benefit of cricketers or persons who may have rendered service to the game of cricket or for their families or to donate for the development or promotion of the game to be regulated by rules framed in this regard from time to time. q. To either on its own, of through its delegate, entertain, hear, and decide administrative appeals by employees or other directly affected parties against the orders of the CEO or the Cricket Committees as the case may be. r. Generally, to do all such other acts and things which are delegated to it by the HCA and all other functions to be expedient, convenient and/or conducive to the carrying out of the above functions of the Apex Council Provided that the exercise of powers under Clauses U), (k), (1), (m), (n) and (0) shall be subject to ratification by the HCA at its next meeting, failing which the rules shall lapse, 5. The Apex Council shall meet at least once every 3 months at such time and place and shall conduct proceedings in such manner as it may from time to time decide. 6. A Special Meeting of the Apex Council may be convened at any time by the President and shall be convened on a requisition to that effect being made in writing by not less than three Councillors. Any such requisition shall express the object of the meeting proposed to be called and shall be sent to the Secretary. 7. Fourteen days’ clear notice of the Meeting of the Apex Council together with the agenda shall be given to the Councillors. For a Special Meeting of the Apex Council convened for the purposes stated in Sub-Rule (5) above, seven days’ clear notice shall be given. An Emergent meeting of the Apex Council may be convened by the President with Two days’ notice. 8. Five members of the Apex Council shall form a quorum for its meetings. The President or in his absence Vice President or in the absence of both a member elected by those present at the meeting shall be the Chairperson. In the event of a tie, the Chairperson shall have a casting vote. 9. 8. Five members of the Apex Council shall form a quorum for its meetings. The President or in his absence Vice President or in the absence of both a member elected by those present at the meeting shall be the Chairperson. In the event of a tie, the Chairperson shall have a casting vote. 9. A resolution by circulation by all members of the Apex Council shall be as valid and effective as if it had been passed at a meeting of the Apex Council. Such a resolution shall be ratified at the next meeting of the Apex Council. 10. The Secretary shall keep the minutes of every Meeting in a book which shall be signed by the Chairperson when approved.” 9. Looking at the powers that are conferred on the Apex Council vide bye-laws, Rules and Regulation No.15, the present lis falls purely under the domain of the Apex Council. As mentioned supra, the Apex Council has not taken any such decision, nor any agenda was placed in meeting dated 25.10.2023 which is the first Apex Council meeting as referred to in the Impugned Proceedings with regard to the domicile criteria. 10. This Court, on earlier occasions, had taken into consideration various controversies that were going on in conducting the league matches by the 2 nd respondent and after considering all the aspects, more specifically career of the budding cricketers, had appointed Sri Justice Naveen Rao (Retd. Acting Chief Justice of this Court) as “Supervisory Committee” to oversee the conducting of league matches of the 2 nd respondent Association. The said order was passed in Writ Petition No.18413 of 2024 on 12.09.2024. 11. It is submitted by the Respondents that Supervisory Committee vide email dated 28.01.2025 addressed to Rthe 4 th respondent, had directed the 2nd respondent to implement the domicile criteria as five years. On verification, it is found that the 4 th respondent had issued e mail to the Supervisory Committee on 28.01.2024 at 11.47 AM and the said mail was replied by the latter at 12.25:11 PM on 28.01.2025. Both the e mails are extracted hereunder: E mail of the Respondent No.4, dated 28.01.2025 at 1147 AM. On 28 Jan 2025, at 11:47 AM, CEO HCA <cea, hvdca@gmail.com> Dear Sir, On 04/11/2024, 1 issued a notification upon your approval regarding the HCA Al Division with the guidelines of promotions, demotions, and player registrations, eligibility criteria. Both the e mails are extracted hereunder: E mail of the Respondent No.4, dated 28.01.2025 at 1147 AM. On 28 Jan 2025, at 11:47 AM, CEO HCA <cea, hvdca@gmail.com> Dear Sir, On 04/11/2024, 1 issued a notification upon your approval regarding the HCA Al Division with the guidelines of promotions, demotions, and player registrations, eligibility criteria. In that the player eligibility was given a quoted below: “PLAYER ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR REGISTRATION Player must meet one of the following criteria: 1. Born in Telangana, or 2. Domicile Proof of last 5 years (if not born in Telangana but residing in Telangana) a. School/college report cards covering 5 years b. Bonafide Certificate from school for 5 years c. Original Date of Birth certificate d. Aadhar Card with Telangana address for the past 5 years, including Aadhar Update History. 3. Exception for Ministry of Defence and Central Government Employees: Employees transferred to Telangana, along with their children and spouses, may register without meeting criteria (1) and (2) upon submission of relevant official documentation” Upon your instructions to reduce to the 5 years domicile requirement to 3 years in line with the eligibility criteria set by the Single Member Committee in 2023, the domicile requirement was reduced to 3 years and an amended notification was issued dated 05/11/2024 with the revised player domicile eligibility of 3 years as quoted below: PLAYER ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR REGISTRATION Player must meet one of the following criteria: 1. Born in Telangana, or 2. Domicile Proof of last 5 years (if not born in Telangana but residing in Telangana) (a) School/college report cards covering 5 years (b) Bonafide Certificate from school for 5 years (c) Original Date of Birth certificate (d) Aadhar Card with Telangana address for the past s years, including Aadhar Update History. 3. Exception for Ministry of Defence and Central Government Employees: Employees transferred to Telangana, along with their children and spouses, may register without meeting criteria (1) and (2) upon submission of relevant official documentation” For the purpose of records and for submissions in WP No. 28136 (Rishiket Sisodia vs Hyderabad Cricket Association), I kindly request you to confirm that the instructions for the player domicile criteria were issued by you. Sincerely, Suneel Kante Chief Executive Officer Hyderabad Cricket Association” E mail of the Supervisory Committee, dated 28.01.2025 at 12:25:11 PM. Sincerely, Suneel Kante Chief Executive Officer Hyderabad Cricket Association” E mail of the Supervisory Committee, dated 28.01.2025 at 12:25:11 PM. “Dear Sunil, Unless I see the relevant correspondence it is not possible to respond to your request. However, as far as I remember, to comply with the mandate given to me by the Hon’ble High Court I have been requesting you to follow the procedure evolved by Justice L. Nageswara Rao team during his lordship tenure on all aspects to conduct various tournaments/leagues including domicile of a player. As informed to me, that team followed three year domicile principle. I am not fully upraised of the issues arising for consideration of Hon’ble High Court in WP No. 28136 and why the domicile issue need to be placed before the Hon’ble High Court. In so far as expressing the stand of the HCA, you have to take the advice of the counsel appearing for the HCA and finalise the pleadings as settled by him. 12. From the contents of the aforesaid two e mails, it is evident that the 4th respondent had issued the notification on 04.11.2024 for conducting HCA Al Division Leagues, wherein the domicile criteria of 5 years was already incorporated and the contents of the said e mail further reflects that on the advice of the Supervisory Committee, the said Domicile criteria was reduced from 5 to 3 years and an amended notification was issued to the said effect on 05.11.2024 requesting the Supervisory Committee to confirm that the instructions for the player domicile criteria were issued by the Supervisory Committee and in response to the same, Supervisory Committee had informed the 4 th respondent that Supervisory Committee is not apprised of the issues arising for consideration of this Court in this Writ Petition and why the domicile issue need to be placed before this Court and Supervisory Committee, in clear terms, had informed the 4th respondent to take the advice of the Counsel appearing for HCA and finalize the pleadings as settled by him. Thereby the submission made by the Senior Counsel appearing for respondents that Supervisory Committee had passed the directions for implementation of Domicile Criteria, on the face of the record, is not correct and per contra putting of domicile criteria in the notifications at the instance of the Supervisory Committee is not accepted by the Supervisory Committee in the e mail issued in response to the e mail of the 4 th respondent. This shows that the 2 nd respondent had already taken a decision and is trying to take shelter under the e mails. The said e mails do not come to the rescue of respondents in justifying the act of issuance of the impugned order by the 3rd respondent. Even otherwise, the respondents have not filed the recommendations of the Single Member Committee (Justice L.Nageshwara Rao, Retired Judge Supreme Court of India). In these circumstances, the submissions of respondents that Domicile Criteria notification was issued as per the directions of the Supervisory Committee is also liable to be rejected. 13. Even otherwise, recommendation by the Single Member Committee is to be implemented by the 2 nd respondent, which implementation shall be in accordance with law. On the face of the record, no such procedure was followed by the 3rd respondent No.3 and so also by the 2 nd respondent in passing the impugned order. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the 3 rd respondent is illegal and arbitrary. 14. Further, general administration of the 2 nd respondent is governed by the Rules and Regulations envisaged in Chapter 5 of the Rules and Regulations of the Association. Rule 21 of Chapter 5 stipulates how cricketing matters need to be handled. Rule 21 is extracted here under: - “ 21. CRICKETING MATTERS (seems to be wrongly printed as MATEIRS) 1. The management of cricketing matters such as selections, coaching and evaluation of team performance shall be exclusively handled by the Cricket Committees comprising only of Players as set out in 2. The management, evaluation and selection of umpires shall be done by Rule 26. The Umpires Committee comprising only of Umpires as set out in the Rule 27. 3. The reports of the Cricket and Umpires Committees shall be sent to the CEO for being forwarded to the Apex Council, but the CEO shall not in any way be involved in the preparation, approval, or amendment of the same.” 15. The Umpires Committee comprising only of Umpires as set out in the Rule 27. 3. The reports of the Cricket and Umpires Committees shall be sent to the CEO for being forwarded to the Apex Council, but the CEO shall not in any way be involved in the preparation, approval, or amendment of the same.” 15. Rule 26 stipulates formation and functions of the cricket committees of the HCA. The said Rule is extracted hereunder:- “ 26. THE CRICKET COMMITIEES 1. The Cricket Committees are the Committees comprised exclusively of former Players who are tasked with the Selection, Coaching and Evaluation of Team Performances. 2. The Cricket Committees are: A. The Men’s Selection Committee i. The Men’s Selection Committee shall select the State Team for representation in any format. This Committee shall also be responsible for providing evaluation reports of the respective team performances to the Apex Council on a quarterly basis. ii. The Men’s Selection Committee shall consist of five persons to be appointed by a Cricket Advisory Committee comprising of reputed former intonational cricketers identified by the HCA at the Annual General Meeting, subject to the following criteria: A. Every member of the Men’s Selection Committee should have played a minimum of: i. Seven Test Matches; or ii. Thirty First Class Matches, or iii. Ten One Day International Matches and twenty First Class Matches. b. Every member of the Men’s Selection Committee should have retired from the game at least 5 years previously. c. The senior most Test cap among the members of the Committee shall be appointed as the Chairperson. iii. The Men’s Selection Committee shall appoint a Captain for the team in each format, who shall be an ex- Officio member of the Committee. The captain, however, shall not be entitled to vote. In the event of there being an equality of votes for the appointment of a Captain, the Chairperson shall have a casting vote. In the event of there being no majority agreement over the selection of the players, the captain’s wishes in that regard shall prevail. iv. On an outside tour, the Cricket Manager/Coach, Captain, and Vice-Captain shall constitute the Selection Committee. The Administrative Manager shall convene the meeting and keep a record of the proceedings.” 16. In the event of there being no majority agreement over the selection of the players, the captain’s wishes in that regard shall prevail. iv. On an outside tour, the Cricket Manager/Coach, Captain, and Vice-Captain shall constitute the Selection Committee. The Administrative Manager shall convene the meeting and keep a record of the proceedings.” 16. Considering the language and intent of Rule 26 & 26 (A), the present lis falls under the domain of the Selection Committee exclusively and the office bearers of the 2nd respondent have no say on the said selection process. 17. This Court had passed the interim order on 04.10.2024 directing respondents to consider the selection of petitioner without imposing domicile criteria. Pursuant to the same, it was informed by learned Senior Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent that petitioner was allowed to play in various tournaments and he had reported to the training sessions along with other players who were selected. Per contra, learned Senior Counsel for petitioner had informed this Court that though petitioner was selected and reported for training sessions, all of a sudden, he was informed orally without giving any reasons, not to participate further in the team, not to attend the training programmes for the ongoing tournaments and the next match as against Bombay. It is to understand the situation that when petitioner having been selected for the teams and was allowed to participate in the training, all of a sudden, asking him not to be a part of the team by the 2 nd respondent clearly reflects high- handed approach of the 2nd respondent - Association through its office bearers and Chief Executive Officer. The 2 nd respondent putting petitioner in a state of uncertainty and their non-response to the e- mails also shows the negligent approach. During the course of the argument, it was stated by learned Senior Counsel that in the selection matches, petitioner played the two matches and had scored significantly 30 against Assam and 101 against Hyderabad Group team. This aspect was fairly admitted by the learned Senior Counsel for Association Sri Ashok Anand Kumar. 18. During the course of the argument, it was stated by learned Senior Counsel that in the selection matches, petitioner played the two matches and had scored significantly 30 against Assam and 101 against Hyderabad Group team. This aspect was fairly admitted by the learned Senior Counsel for Association Sri Ashok Anand Kumar. 18. Implementation of the recommendation of Three Member Committee dated 17.02.2024 and implementation of the recommendations, directions passed by the Single Member Committee and also of the Supervisory Committee shall be done in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Association but certainly not by the office bearers of the 2nd respondent Association as per their will and pleasure. The act of issuance of the impugned notification by the 3 rd respondent is without authority and jurisdiction. The Notification dated 07.11.2023 is therefore, liable to be set aside. 19. The Writ Petition is accordingly, allowed, setting aside the notification dated 07.11.2023 issued by the 3rd respondent. Respondents are directed to consider the eligibility of petitioner for selection as a player for the State of Telangana. 20. Consequently, miscellaneous Applications, if any shall stand closed.