CCC/1357/2025 of SRI VISHWAS K S Vs DR SHALINI RAJNEESH on 31 August 2026

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE)

1. The State Government has filed the present appeal impugning an order dated 21.07.2025 [impugned order] passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.20895/2023 (GM- RES). The respondent had filed the said petition inter alia praying as under: “Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus ordering the payment of cash award of Rs.6,00,000/- as per the Government Order No.YuSeEe 278 YuSeKree 2013 dated 30-11-2013 (at Annexure C) and Government Order No.YuSeEe 280 YuSeKree 2017 dated 09-10-2017 (at Annexure E).”

2. The respondent is an accomplished sports person and has won several medals in para-swimming championships. The respondent claims that he is eligible for cash awards aggregating to `6,00,000/- in terms of the Government Order dated 30.11.2013. However, the same was not disbursed.

HC-KAR

3. The learned Single Judge had found merit in the respondent’s contention and, accordingly, held that the respondent was entitled to the amount as claimed.

4. The impugned order refers to the submission made on behalf of the appellants that only `4,74,000/- was to be disbursed and, accordingly, the court directed that the balance amount of `1,26,000/- be paid as well. In addition, the learned Single Judge had also directed payment of costs of `2,00,000/- towards litigation expenses.

5. The State has disbursed cash awards aggregating to a sum of `14,25,000/- during the period 2015 to 2022 to the respondent as set out in the tabular statement handed over to this court. The said statement indicates that all the cash awards paid relate to national events, except `1,00,000/- paid for winning a bronze medal in IDM BERLIN, 31 International German Championship 2017 held between 6th and 9th of July 2017. The respondent does not dispute receipt of the aforesaid amounts.

HC-KAR

6. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent amply clarified at the outset that the respondent’s claim in the writ petition was not for a reward for any national event but for international events. As noted above, the respondent had claimed a sum of `6,00,000/- under the Government Order dated 30.11.2013 in respect of international events against which the respondent has admittedly received a sum of `1,00,000/-.

7. The respondent claimed that he had won the following medals which was set out in the letter dated 04.08.2023 addressed to the Commissioner, Directorate of Youth Empowerment and Sports, State Youth Centre, Yavanika: “ - Bronze medal in IDM Berlin Para Swimming German Open (2017 and 2018)

- 2 Silver medals and 1 Bronze medal at Speedo Can Am International Para Swimming Championships in Ottawa, Canada (2016)

- 1 Gold and 2 Silver medals in National Para-swimming in Udaipur (2017)

- 5 Gold medals in Indian Open Swimming Competition, Bangalore (2018)”

HC-KAR

8. The impugned order is premised on the basis that the respondent is entitled to the cash awards claimed on the basis of the aforementioned events.

9. It is noted that the National Para-Swimming Championship held in Udaipur (2017) and the Indian Open Swimming Competition held in Bengaluru (2018) were national events, and there is no dispute that the respondent has received cash awards in respect of the medals won in those events. Further, as noted above, the respondent had also received a cash award of `1,00,000/- for winning a bronze medal in IDM Berlin International German Championship held in 2017.

10. The cash awards in respect of the events held in the year 2018 are not covered under the Government Order dated 30.11.2013 as the same are covered under the policy set out in the Government Order dated 09.10.2017, which limits the maximum cash price to `5,00,000/- per annum. The bronze medal won by the respondent in IDM Berlin Para Swimming German Open held in 2018 is, thus, not covered under the Government Order dated 30.11.2013.

HC-KAR

11. The controversy centres around the respondent’s claim for cash award in respect of 2 silver medals and 1 bronze medal won at ‘Speedo Can Am International Para Swimming Championship’ held in Ottawa, Canada in the year 2016. According to the State, the respondent is not entitled to any cash award in respect of the medals won in the said event under the Government Order dated 30.11.2013. The respondent contends to the contrary.

12. In view of the above, the only question to be addressed is whether the medals won at Speedo Can Am International Para Swimming Championships held in Ottawa, Canada would qualify the respondent for cash awards under the said Government Order dated 30.11.2013.

13. Concededly, the respondent had participated in the said event on an invitation. The respondent did not complete any selection process to participate in the said event. Under the Government Order dated 30.11.2013, an athlete is entitled to cash award of `2,00,000/- for a silver medal in any international disabled championship and `1,00,000/- for a bronze medal in any international disabled championships. On the said basis, the

HC-KAR

respondent claims `4,00,000/- against 2 silver medals and `1,00,000/- against the bronze medal won at the Speedo Can Am International Para Swimming Championship held in 2016. However, the Government had issued certain guidelines by the Government Order dated 30.11.2013 which is central to to the controversy. The relevant extract of the said guidelines is set out below:

“1. This scheme will be applicable only to physically challenged athletes who has represented the state of Karnataka and participated in national and international sports and won.

2. Selection to National Sports Teams as recognized by Government of India shall be given only to the disabled athletes of Karnataka who have participated in international Games/Championships.

3. xxx xxx xxx

4. The Athletes with disabilities who have participated in international invitational sports events are not eligible for this special cash award.

5. The Sports Authority of India, the National Federation of Concerned Sports recognized by the Government of India, shall provide a letter of confirmation from the State or which organization the Athlete with Disabilities has been selected to represent for the international Games.

6. The Athletes with disabilities who have direct entry in any international/national sports competition are not eligible for this award.”

HC-KAR

14. As is apparent, paragraph 2 of the guidelines expressly provides that selection to the National Sports Team would be confined to athletes who participated in international games/championships. Paragraph 4 of the guidelines expressly provides that athletes who participate in international invitational sports events are not eligible for special cash awards. In the present case, as noted above, there is no dispute that the ‘Speedo Can Am International Para Swimming Championships’ held in Ottawa in the year 2016 was an invitation sports event. As noted above, the respondent did not undergo any selection process through the National Sports Federation to participate in the said event. He participated in the said event by invitation. It is also conceded that he had a direct entry to the said international event. Para 6 of the guidelines also expressly provides that athletes who have direct entry in any international or national sports competitions are not eligible for the special cash awards.

15. The Government Order dated 30.11.2013 setting out the guidelines for grant of cash awards is not under challenge. The import of the said guidelines is that the respondent would not be

HC-KAR

eligible for special cash awards in respect of the medals won at the Speedo Can Am International Para Swimming Championships held in Ottawa in 2016.

16. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent earnestly contended that the Speedo Can Am International Para Swimming Championships is a prestigious international event and the respondent’s participation would necessarily have to be through the National Sports Federation. She submitted that the said event is equivalent to any other international championship and thus, no distinction could be drawn on the basis that the said event is an invitational event.

17. We are unable to accept the aforesaid contention for more than one reason. First, the cash award is not a matter of right. It is an ex gratia payment to encourage participation in sports. Having stated the above, there is no dispute that the respondent would be entitled to the rights under Article 14 of the Constitution of India and thus, cannot be discriminated against. There is no averment that any other athlete who had participated in an invitational event was

HC-KAR

granted a cash award. The exclusion of invitational events is also not arbitrary.

18. Second, there is no challenge to the Government Order dated 30.11.2013 and in terms of the said order, the respondent would not be entitled to a cash award for an invitational event. Third, that the guidelines excluding invitational events from the eligibility for special cash awards cannot be considered as ex facie arbitrary or unreasonable. Government policy is clear: cash awards are provided only where the athlete has undergone a selection process and represents the national team. This would necessarily entail an additional layer of competition for selection to participate in events eligible for cash awards. In this view, treating the invitational events as distinct from other events cannot be considered arbitrary.

19. In the aforesaid view, the impugned order is unsustainable and is, accordingly, set aside.

HC-KAR

CCC No.1357/2025

20. In view of the orders passed in Writ Appeal No.2061/2025, the complaint − CCC No.1357/2025 does not survive and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

21. The pending interlocutory application also stands disposed of.

Sd/- (VIBHU BAKHRU) CHIEF JUSTICE

Sd/- (K.S. HEMALEKHA) JUDGE

AHB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 14