Image Source: AGENCIES

The Delhi High Court has duly dismissed a petition filed by two professional wrestlers seeking to revoke the exemption granted by the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) Special Committee to top athletes Vinesh Phogat and Bajrang Punia from the Asian Games trial.

Two points the court emphasized in its dismissal of the appeal are notable. First, the Court said that the IOA Commission's decision was in no way "arbitrary" or "illegal" but was made "in good faith" and was based on genuine concern about the possibility of damage to the medals and, in the event of damage, insufficient pre-Games healing time. Second, HC asserted that the petition denial made no comment on the merits of the plaintiff's grappler, who was "good at wrestling."

Selection is a difficult process, and subsequent complaints are not uncommon or unexpected. No one denies that there is no controversy about how sports federations work. The argument that sports federations need their grievance committees and redress mechanisms to deal with such disputes is not new.

Wrestlers' protests against WFI president Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh have highlighted the inadequacy of the POSH committees in Indian sports federations. It is this division that has forced these wrestlers to take to the streets and protest. Of the approximately 30 sports federations in India, less than half have established POSH committees. Who do athletes turn to in disputes over selection? So was court the only door the petitioner wrestler could knock on? What is the only reliable mechanism by which they can log complaints?

Athletes are never argumentative. But there are young wrestlers here, including U-20 world champions and U-23 Asian champions, who believe their claims are valid and are willing to take on the sport's greats. Of course, they should be heard, but the courtroom is the wrong place. As HC correctly pointed out.