JUSTICE (RETD) NAGESWARA RAO has left it to the Supreme Court to take “a suitable view” on two contentious provisions: Article 23.3 and Article 25.3 (b) & (c) of the draft constitution of the All India Football Federation (AIFF). His observations were made in a report submitted to the apex court following stakeholder consultations.
On 9 October, the AIFF approached the Supreme Court seeking clarity on these two articles, in light of objections raised by the world football governing body, FIFA. The following day, a bench of the Supreme Court directed Justice Rao, a former judge of the apex court and the principal author of the AIFF’s draft constitution, to hear all stakeholders and submit a detailed report.
During the meeting, the AIFF requested that Article 25.3 (b) and (c) should not be enforced until the term of the current executive committee concludes in September 2026.
Article 23.3 stipulates that no amendment to the AIFF constitution shall take effect without the prior approval of the Supreme Court. Article 25.3 (b) and (c) bar any office bearer of the AIFF Executive Committee from simultaneously holding a position in a member or state association.
Justice Rao submitted his report to the court on 12 October, stating that while the final decision rests with the Supreme Court, he had earlier recommended deletion of both clauses from the draft constitution.
The Supreme Court had previously, on 19 September, approved the AIFF’s draft constitution prepared by Justice Rao with certain modifications and directed its adoption within four weeks. The AIFF officially adopted the SC-approved constitution at its Special General Body Meeting on 12 October, excluding the two disputed clauses pending further directions from the court.
In his report, Justice Rao noted that the AIFF’s immediate concern is that implementing Article 25.3 (b) and (c) would compel a majority of its office bearers, many of whom also hold posts in their respective state associations, to resign.
He added that the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports supported the AIFF’s position during the 10 October meeting, saying “it’s common practice prevalent in other National Sports Federations, where office bearers of state associations are also office bearers in the NSF concurrently”. Justice Rao reiterated his earlier stance recommending the deletion of both Article 23.3 and Article 25.3 (b) & (c).
“During meeting with FIFA and AFC officials in July 2023, FIFA and AFC agreed on various issues in the constitution prepared by Committee of Administrators. However, convinced with the firm stand of FIFA on the basis of Articles 14 and 19 of the FIFA statute, I deleted Article 23.3 from the draft submitted to the Supreme Court,” he wrote.
Referring to a FIFA email dated 9 October, he wrote that the governing body had again invoked Articles 14 and 19 to reinforce its objection. He therefore recommended that the Supreme Court reconsider its position on Article 23.3 in light of FIFA’s viewpoint.
Regarding Article 25.3 (b) and (c), Justice Rao reiterated that he found no conflict of interest in allowing individuals to serve concurrently as office bearers of both the AIFF and its member/state associations, and therefore had earlier suggested their deletion.
