Recognition of Pickleball Federation Is a Policy Decision, Courts Won’t Sit in Appeal: Delhi High Court
Notes Pickleball is an emerging sport, cannot be treated on par with legacy sports
Justice Sachin Datta, Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has declined to interfere with the Union Government’s decision recognising the Indian Pickleball Association (IPA) as the National Sports Federation (NSF) for pickleball, holding that the grant of recognition lies squarely within the policy domain of the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports (MYAS) and is not open to judicial review in the absence of arbitrariness or mala fides.
The Court observed that emerging sports like pickleball, being newly introduced, geographically limited in spread, and still evolving, cannot be treated on par with established or legacy sports; mechanically applying the Sports Code, 2011 to both would amount to treating unequals as equals.
Justice Sachin Datta observed, “It is not within the province of this Court to second guess / sit in appeal over the comparative merits / de-merits of the respondent no.2 vis-àvis the petitioner association or any other association functioning in the sport of pickleball in the country. Necessarily, the requisite exercise has to be conducted by the MYAS. Given the justification offered by the MYAS/UOI in the counter-affidavit, it cannot be said that grant of the recognition to the respondent no.2 is ex-facie arbitrary or suffers from manifest unreasonableness, warranting interference in these proceedings”.
The bench after considering the counter affidavit filed on behalf of UOI/MYAS noted that the Ministry granted recognition to the IPA considering that it had affiliations in 26 States/UTs (meeting the 2/3rd representation requirement), was linked to the Global Pickleball Federation which had a wider international presence in the absence of an IOC-recognised body, demonstrated adequate compliance and membership strength, and had a constitution broadly aligned with the Sports Code, 2011 unlike the petitioner’s body.
Senior Advocate Dayan Krishnan appeared for the petitioner and Senior Advocates Jayant Mehta, Rajshekhar Rao, D. N. Goburdhan appeared for the respondents.
In the present dispute, the Sports Ministry accorded recognition to the Indian Pickleball Association as the national federation for pickleball in India.
However, the decision was challenged by a rival body, the All-India Pickleball Association (AIPBA) which claimed that it was the original and legitimate federation representing the sport and that the recognition granted to IPA was illegal and contrary to the National Sports Development Code of India.
It was argued by the petitioner that Pickleball was not properly evaluated before recognition and that due process under the Sports Code was not followed. It was further contended that the Ministry ignored the petitioner’s claim of prior existence and wider representation.
Although the Union Government argued that recognition of a National Sports Federation is a policy decision, taken after due assessment of compliance with eligibility norms. Further that the Indian Pickleball Association fulfilled the requirements under the Sports Code, including governance structure, transparency norms, and nationwide representation.
The bench noted in the judgment that the respondent association was exempted from Sports Code requirements of (i) three years’ prior existence for NSF recognition and (ii) having 50% district unit affiliation. These relaxations were granted by the Ministry as a policy decision, considering pickleball’s emerging nature and the need to promote the sport in India.
It further observed that the Sports Code provides for annual renewal of recognition and empowers the MYAS/Union to suspend or withdraw it. Recognition or relaxation is therefore not permanent and it can be revisited each year and denied if the federation fails to meet required milestones or show adequate progress.
Accordingly, the petition was dismissed, and the recognition granted to the Indian Pickleball Association as the National Sports Federation was directed to continue to operate.
The rival association was left at liberty to pursue remedies, if any, in accordance with law, but not through interference with the Government’s policy decision.
Cause Title: All India Pickleball Association v. Union Of India & Anr. [Neutral Citation: 2026:DHC:836]
Appearances:
Petitioner: Dayan Krishnan, Sr. Advocate, Gautam Narayan, Hemant Phalpher, R. A. Iyer, Disha Joshi and Sukrit Seth, Advocates.
Respondents: Jayant Mehta, Sr. Advocate, Arunima Dwivedi, CGSC, Aakash Pathak, GP, Pinky Pawar, Sainyam Bhardwaj, Mohd. Zeeshan, Rajshekhar Rao, Sr., Ashish Verma, Saksham Thareja, Nikhil Thakur and Kartikey Bhargava, D. N. Goburdhan, Sr. Advocate, Kunal Kohli, Shreyha Kohli, Advocates.