Thu Dec 04 00:00:00 UTC 2025: Summary:
The Tamil Nadu Senior Advocates Forum (TNSAF) has filed a public interest litigation (PIL) in the Madras High Court challenging the constitutional validity of Sections 17, 22, and 25 of the National Sports Governance Act (NSGA) of 2025. The TNSAF argues that these sections, which allow appeals from the National Sports Tribunal to go directly to the Supreme Court, bypass the jurisdiction of High Courts, violate several articles of the Constitution, and subvert the basic structure of the Constitution. The Madras High Court has called for a counter affidavit from the central government.
News Article:
Madras High Court Hears Challenge to National Sports Governance Act, Alleges Bypassing of High Court Jurisdiction
CHENNAI, December 4, 2025 – The Madras High Court is hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the Tamil Nadu Senior Advocates Forum (TNSAF) challenging the constitutional validity of key sections of the National Sports Governance Act (NSGA) of 2025. The forum argues that the Act, intended to improve sports governance and dispute resolution, unconstitutionally bypasses the jurisdiction of High Courts by allowing direct appeals from the newly established National Sports Tribunal to the Supreme Court.
The TNSAF contends that Sections 17, 22, and 25 of the NSGA violate Articles 14, 21, 39-A, 226, and 227 of the Constitution. They specifically criticize the composition of the National Sports Tribunal, alleging that the two non-judicial members could outweigh the judicial chairperson. Furthermore, they assert that allowing direct appeals to the Supreme Court undermines the federal structure of the court system and encroaches on the powers of the High Courts.
Senior Counsel Srinath Sridevan, representing the TNSAF, argued that the Act’s provision for direct appeals to the Supreme Court “offends the right of access to justice and also perpetuates the ever increasing trend of tribunalisation with diluted supervision of constitutional courts.”
The First Division Bench of Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G. Arul Murugan has directed the central government to file a counter affidavit within three weeks. Additional Solicitor General AR.L. Sundaresan appeared on behalf of the Centre.
The outcome of this case could have significant implications for the structure of sports governance in India and the balance of power between the High Courts and the Supreme Court.
First Piper 