Administrative Discretion Not Placed Beyond Judicial Review: Supreme Court Directs To Grant Permission To J&K Physical Ed. Teacher For National Kayaking Coaching
|The Supreme Court also set aside the Government Order denying the aggrieved teacher the requisite permission to relieve her for the national sporting assignments.
The Supreme Court has come to the aid of a Physical Education Teacher in the Department of Youth Services and Sports by directing the Jammu & Kashmir Government to issue the necessary relieving order and permission to enable her to join and discharge the remaining assignment as Coach/Chief Coach of the Indian National Kayaking and Canoeing Team for the Asian Games, 2026. The Apex Court also held that Article 14 of the Indian Constitution operates upon the exercise of administrative discretion as much as it does upon a statutory decision.
The Apex Court was considering an appeal challenging the judgment of the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court.
The Division Bench of Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi held, “The absence of an absolute right to obtain a favourable administrative decision cannot be equated with the absence of a right to fair, reasonable, non-arbitrary and timely consideration of a request, which in our considered opinion are two distinct propositions. It is settled position of law that administrative discretion is not placed beyond judicial review merely because the ultimate relief sought lies within the discretion of the executive. Article 14 of the Indian Constitution operates upon the exercise of administrative discretion as much as it does upon a statutory decision. Where an authority is vested with discretion, it must consider the matter on relevant considerations, exclude extraneous considerations, apply its mind to the purpose for which the request has been made and act within a reasonable time.”
“The present appeal succeeds on the broader and independent grounds relating to failure of timely consideration, nonapplication of mind to the nature of the national assignment and the effect of the operative judicial direction dated 06.05.2026”, it ordered.
Senior Advocate Najmi Waziri represented the Appellant while Advocate Parth Awasthi represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
The appellant, Indian Kayaking and Canoeing Association, is a recognised National Sports Federation concerned with the discipline of Kayaking and Canoeing. Its annual recognition for the year 2026 was renewed by the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports up to December 31, 2026, subject to the outcome of the relevant court proceedings. The third Respondent – Bilquis Mir, a government employee serving as a Physical Education Teacher in the Department of Youth Services and Sports, Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, was selected for the coaching assignment concerning the Indian National Kayaking and Canoeing Team in connection with the preparatory programme for the Asian Games, 2026. The respondent was appointed as an International Technical Official for the Canoe Sprint discipline for the Asian Games Nagoya 2026 and separately selected to officiate as the Chief Finish Line Judge at the 2026 ICF Canoe Sprint World Cup.
On February 3, 2026, the appellant addressed a communication to the competent authorities of the Union Territory requesting that the services of the third respondent be made available for the National Coaching Camp. The communication specifically referred to the necessity of an experienced coach for the preparation of the Indian team for the Asian Games and sought her services. With the request remaining undecided, the appellant instituted a Petition before the High Court. The substantive relief sought was a writ of mandamus directing the official respondents to grant the requisite permission, relieving order and No Objection Certificate to the respondent to discharge her duties as Chief Coach of the Indian National Team and to participate in the Asian Games 2026 preparatory programme and connected international assignments.The Respondents were directed to accord provisional permission to the respondent to discharge her duties as Chief Coach/Coach of the Indian National Kayaking and Canoeing Team for the Asian Games 2026 and to travel to Hungary for officiating at the ICF Canoe Sprint World Cup. In her representation, the respondent recorded that the World Cup had already concluded and that the opportunity to officiate therein had been lost. She thereafter sought immediate compliance insofar as the continuing National Coaching assignment was concerned.
The Government of Jammu and Kashmir issued a Government Order stating that the respondent was under inquiry and treated this circumstance as disentitling her to permission. Contempt proceedings thereafter came to be initiated, and the Single Judge noted that the World Cup event had already passed and expressed concern that the Government Order had dealt with the controversy substantially as an ordinary service matter without addressing the national sporting assignment for which the appellant had sought the services of the respondent. Thereafter, the Division Bench directed the Government of India, Ministry concerned with Youth Affairs and Sports, to formulate a statutory framework governing the placement of the services of Government employees who are outstanding sportspersons at the disposal of recognised National Sports Federations. The Division Bench further held that once the Government had subsequently passed the order, the grievance regarding delay paled into insignificance.
Reasoning
The Bench concurred with the view of the High Court that neither a Government employee nor a borrowing organisation could claim an absolute or indefeasible right to deputation or foreign travel, and the employer is entitled to take into account service exigencies, applicable rules, disciplinary proceedings and other relevant considerations.
The Bench took note of the fact that the appellant was not seeking the services of respondent for an indefinite private engagement. The request emanated from a recognised National Sports Federation and concerned preparation of an Indian National Team for an identified international sporting event. The Bench was of the view that the request was therefore required to be considered in that factual setting. Taking note of the fact that the Respondent was selected to officiate at the World Cup scheduled between May 8, 2026 and May 10, 2026 and the Government Order rejecting permission came only on June 19, 2026, more than a month after that event had concluded, the Bench held that the failure to decide the request in time had already produced an irreversible consequence.
Thus, allowing the appeal, the Bench set aside the Government Order insofar as it operated to deny the third respondent permission/NOC and relieving for the national sporting assignments. The Bench thus directed the Jammu and Kashmir Government as well as the Director General, Directorate of Youth Services and Sports to issue the necessary relieving order/No Objection Certificate/permission in favour of the third respondent to enable her to join and discharge the remaining assignment as Coach/Chief Coach of the Indian National Kayaking and Canoeing Team and to assist the Indian National Team in connection with the Asian Games, 2026.
Cause Title: Indian Kayaking and Canoeing Association v. Union Territory of J&K (Neutral Citation: 2026 INSC 981)
Appearance
Appellant: Senior Advocate Najmi Waziri, AOR Arvind Gupta, Advocates Ashwini Kumar, Arbaaz Khan, Sohail Khan, Kanav Bhardwaj, Priyanshu Kumar
Respondent: Advocate Parth Awasthi, AOR Pashupathi Nath Razdan, Advocate Khowaja Siddiqui, AOR Sandeep Gupta, Advocate Kanchan Gupta