Nikhat Parveen Minor Thru. Father Meer Karrar v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Sports Deptt. Lko And 4
Case at a glance
- Bench
- PANKAJ BHATIA
Outcome
Disposed of
Considering the said submission, the present petition is disposed of
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. Considering the said submission, the present petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to approach the respondent no. 5 along with the child. The respondent no. 5 shall conduct a fresh age determination test and shall issue a certificate accordingly.
Judgment
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent(s) as well as Shri Ashutosh Shahi, learned counsel appearing for respondents no.2 and 4 and perused the record.
The contention of counsel for the petitioner is that for participation in the competitive sports, it is incumbent that the petitioner, who is a minor, undergoes an age determination test. It is argued that in the age determination test, the age was determined as 16 years, which is wrong and despite the fact that in all other records, the age of the petitioner is 11 years and 8 months, she has been shown to be aged about 16 years. It is argued that the respondent no.5 should conduct a re-test on the child in question.
Operative part
Considering the said submission, the present petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to approach the respondent no. 5 along with the child. The respondent no. 5 shall conduct a fresh age determination test and shall issue a certificate accordingly.
The re-test, as directed above, shall be done within a period of two days from the petitioner approaching the respondent no.5. September 25, 2025 Anand/- (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.