High Court · 2025

WP No. 22930 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASRESERVED ON: 16-07-2025PRONOUNCED ON: 30-07-2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPANWP No. 22930 of 2025ANDWMP NO. 25766 OF 20251. Minor Guhan Vasanth ARep Herein By Father And Natural Guardian Mr.V.Anand, No.53/2, Kamatchi Illam, Krishnan Kovil Street, Beema Nagar, Trichirappalli-620 001Petitioner(s)Vs1. State Of Tamil NaduRep By Its Secretary To Government, Higher Education Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 0092.The Director Of Technical EducationGuindy, Chennai-600 025.3.The Registrar Anna UniversityGuindy, Chennai-600 025.4.The Member Secretary/chief Executive Officer(chief Secretary Tamil nadu Sports Minister)sports Development Authority Of Tamilnadu, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Raja Muthia Road, Periyamet, Chennai-600 003.5.The Secretary To Government Of India,Ministry Of Youth Affairs And Sports, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 22930 of 2025Government Of India, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi - 110 001. (R5 Suo Motu Impleaded Vide Order Dated 01.07.2025 Made In Wp.22930/2025 By CKJ)Respondent(s)PRAYERWrit Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to accept the marks for sports achievement as claimed by the petitioner in his application bearing No.208291 dated 27.5.2025 and accordingly grant admission to B.E./B.Tech Degree course.For Petitioner(s):P.Arumuga Rajan M. RajuFor Respondent(s):Mr. C. Jayaprakash,Govt Advocate For R1 And R2, Mr. U. Baranidharan, Standing Counsel For R3, Mrs. N.S. Tanvi For R4. Mr.A. Kumaraguru For R5*****ORDERThis writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to accept the marks for sports achievement as claimed by the petitioner in his application bearing No.208291 dated 27.5.2025 and accordingly grant admission to B.E./B.Tech Degree course.2. Heard Mr.P.Arumuga Rajan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.C.Jayaprakash, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 & 2, Mr.U.Bharanidharan, learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent, Ms.N.S.Tanvi, learned counsel for the 4th respondent and Mr.A.Kumaraguru, learned counsel for the 5th respondent. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 22930 of 20253. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's son belongs to low income group, and the first Graduate of his family and is also an eminent sports person in Roller Skating. It is his further contention that the petitioner's son Guhan Vasanth participated in various National and International events. The learned counsel would submit that he has applied to the Tamil Nadu Engineering Admission-2025 under the special reservation categories, qua eminent sports persons' quota and he secured II place/Silver Medal in the International tournament qua 19th Asian Championship competition/tournament at Beidaihe, China. It is his contention that he has made a special achievements in International Tournament, which is eligible to come within category II International Tournament as per prospectus. Therefore, contended that he is entitled for an allocation of 450 marks. Hence, he has come up with a prayer to accept the marks for his sports achievement.4. This contention was stoutly objected by Ms.N.S.Tanvi, learned counsel for the 4th respondent [contesting respondent] and would contend that the Tournament participated by the petitioner will not come within the Category-II, as 5 countries only had participated in the event participated by the petitioner. Therefore, contended that the petitioner will not come within the eligibility criteria of Category-II International Tournaments. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 22930 of 20255. The learned Senior Panel Counsel Mr.A.Kumaraguru, who appeared for the 5th respondent on written instructions from the Under Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Youth Affairs would submit that the National Sports Federation for the promotion and development of sports discipline of Roller-Skating has been approved by the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports. It is the further submission that the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports will not give any prior approval except for the Olympic, Asian and Commonwealth Games. The learned counsel would further submit that, for the 19th Asian Roller-Skating Championship held in October 2023 in China, the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports did not give any NOC. 6. The learned Government Advocate Mr.Jayaprakash, appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that the petitioner was allotted in Computer Science in Engineering [Cyber Security] at Saveetha Engineering College (Autonomous) in the counselling dated 12.07.2025 and that the 4th respondent is the appropriate authority to recognize his Sports achievement. Hence, he supports the contention of the 4th respondent.7. I have given my anxious consideration to either side submissions.8. Now the short point to be considered in the present writ petition is that, whether the 19th Asian Championship competition/tournaments https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 22930 of 2025held at Beidaihe, China from 18.10.2023 to 28.10.2023 will come within the category II, under the guidelines for International Tournaments for the allotment of seats under eminent Sports person quota. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner participated in the 19th Asian Championship competitions/tournaments, and secured 2nd place in Under-19 Men Game. In order to avail the weightage marks for the allotment of seats under the eminent Sports person quota, he must fulfil the conditions stipulated in Annexure III of the information brochure of the Tamil Nadu Engineering Admission, 2025 application.9. More precisely, the claim of the petitioner comes within 4.(a) under Category-II. For ready reference, the same is extracted hereunder:-“4.(a) Guidelines For International Tournaments:-Category-II:- World Championship, World cup, Asian Championship, SAF Games (South Asian Games), Commonwealth championship Organized in 2 years frequency by the International Sports Federation.Eligibility for athletes requires participation in an event involving at least seven different countries and such competition should have been approved by Indian Olympics Association (IOA), Sports Authority of India (SAI) and Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports (MYAS).Open or Invitational or Memorial or any indifferent nomenclature or title of tournaments or Championships at International level, not approved by any of the above authority will not be considered for marks.” https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 22930 of 2025According to the above clause, in order to come within Category-II, “the athletes requires participation in an event involving at least seven different countries” and such competition should have been approved by the Indian Olympics Association, Sports Authority of India and Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports [MYAS].10. On harmonious reading of the above clause, the words “event” and “competition” need interpretation. It is the contention of the petitioner that the word “event” has a broader meaning. According to the petitioner, the word “event” must be correlated with 19th Asian Roller-Skating Championship competition/tournaments, where there was a “competition”, for Senior Men, and Under-19 Men. Though in Under-19 Men competition, 5 countries had participated, in Senior Men competition, Ten countries had participated. Therefore, contended that the event in which the petitioner participated has the participants of more than 7 countries and eligible to be considered under category-II, and eligible for weightage marks. But, such contention was stoutly objected by the 4th respondent. 11. In order to substantiate the same, the learned counsel for the 4th respondent invited the attention of this Court about their counter statement, wherein in paragraph 10, they have extracted Rule 45 of the Olympic Charter. For ready reference, paragraph 10 of the counter affidavit of the 4th respondent is extracted hereunder:- https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 22930 of 2025“10.It is submitted that this meaning for the term “event” is followed eve in the Olympics. It is submitted that in Rule 45 of the Olympic Charter, “event” has been described as follows-“PROGRAMME OF THE OLYMPIC GAMES45 Programme of the Olympic Games2.2 The events programme, which includes all events, as determined by the IOC Executive Board for a specific edition of the Olympic Games (“the events programme”)An event is a specific competition in a sport resulting in a ranking giving rise to the award of medals and diplomas.”12. Taking cue from the above explanation, contended that, the word “event” only denotes a specific competition of the sports tournament. Through that analogy, the learned counsel would submit that admittedly in Under-19 events, 5 countries had participated, whereas to come under Category-II, there should have been participation from atleast 7 different Countries. 13. In order to interpret the word “event” and “competition”, this Court would like to look at the General Conditions 5.6 and 5.11 of the prospectus. For ready reference, the same are extracted hereunder:-“5.General Conditions1. ......2. ......3. ......4. ......5. ...... https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 22930 of 20256. Direct participation or achievement at any level without participating in the qualifying level competitions such as District or State Sports Association or National Sports Federation to represent the District or State or National or International tournaments or championships will not be considered for award of marks.7. ......8. ......9. ......10. ......11.Multiple events in a particular sport must be standardized events and in accordance with the events organized by the approved International Federations. Events newly created and not in accordance with the requirement will not be considered for award of marks.”14. While harmoniously look at the above Clauses, it would only give a meaning that the “competition” denotes the tournament containing many events, and such position has been clearly referred in 5.6 & 5.11, where 5.6 refers the word competition for tournament such as District, National and etc., likewise 5.11 refers multiple events in a particular sport. 15. Even while going into the deeper analysis of the semantics of the word “event” and “Competition”, in Oxford Dictionary New 9th Edition, the meaning of “competition” and “event” have been explained as follows:- “'Competition'-1. a situation in which people or organizations compete with each other for sth that not everyone can have: There is now intense competition between schools to attract students. We are in competition with four other companies for the contract. We won the contract in the face of stiff competition.2. an event in which people compete with each other to find out who is the best at sth: a music/photo, etc. competition to enter/win/lose a competition3. the competition-the people who are competing https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 22930 of 2025against sb: We'll be able to assess the competition at the conference.'event' – 1. a thing that happens, especially sth important: The election was the main event of 2008. In the light of later events the decision was proved right. The decisions we take now may influence the course of events (=the way things happen) in the future. Everyone was frightened by the strange sequence of events. In the normal course of events (=if things had happened as expected) she would have gone with him.2. a planned public or social occasion: a fund-raising event the social event of the year3 one of the races or competitions in a sports programme. The 800 metres is the fourth event of the afternoon.”16. While analysing the above explanations, in the present set of facts, the word “event” could only be correlated to Under-19 Men Game, where there were only 5 participants. The contention of the petitioner is that in the 19th Asian Championship Tournaments, there were 10 countries for Senior Men. That definition cannot be accepted, as even in the Form I submitted by the petitioner, the 19th Asian Championship tournament was referred as a competition/tournament. Therefore, it unambiguously establishes that the “competition” is nothing, but a tournament, whereas “event” is a specific game, in which the participants played.17. Admittedly, in the case in hand, the petitioner participated in an event of Under 19 Men of 19th Asian Championship Roller-Skating competition, where only 5 countries had participated. Therefore, the petitioner does not come within the Category-II. Hence, this Court does not find any merits in the writ petition. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 22930 of 202518. In the result, this writ petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected WMP is also closed.30-07-2025Kmi/kvIndex:YesSpeaking orderInternet:YesNeutral Citation:YesTo1.State Of TamilnaduRep By Its Secretary To Government, Higher Education Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 0092.The Director Of Technical EducationGuindy, Chennai-600 0253.The Registrar Anna UniversityGuindy, Chennai-600 0254.The Member Secretary/chief Executive Officer(chief Secretary Tamil nadu Sports Minister)sports Development Authority Of Tamil nadu, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, Raja Muthia Road, Periyamet, Chennai-600 0035.The Secretary To Government Of India,Ministry Of Youth Affairs And Sports, Government Of India, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi - 110 001. (R5 Suo Motu Impleaded Vide Order Dated 01.07.2025 Made In Wp.22930/2025 By CKJ) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 22930 of 2025C.KUMARAPPAN J.Kmi/kvPre-Delivery Order inWP No.22930 of 2025AND WMP NO.25766 OF 202530-07-2025