The Supreme Court of India has consented to promptly review an appeal brought by two dressage riders contesting the Delhi High Court’s decision not to interfere in the selection process of India’s Dressage team for the 2026 Asian Games. This decision follows the identification of procedural lapses by the Equestrian Federation of India (EFI). Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and R Mahadevan have slated the hearing for July 9, after senior counsel’s request for an urgent review.
Justice Amanullah amusingly noted his fondness for the sport, as dressage involves a rider guiding their horse through a sequence of meticulous, predetermined maneuvers in a set arena.
Background of the Legal Challenge
The appeal originates from petitions filed by riders Anush Agarwalla and Sudipti Hajela, who were relegated to the reserve list, challenging their exclusion from the main squad. The appellants question a July 6 ruling by the Delhi High Court’s Division Bench, which opted not to interfere with the team selection, despite acknowledging EFI’s non-compliance with its selection criteria.
The High Court, comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia, determined that clauses 15(a) and 15(b) of EFI’s selection guidelines were not adhered to. These clauses necessitate creating a roster of ‘probables’ before the final team is formed. Additionally, Clause 8(f), which mandates publishing a provisional merit list, was overlooked.
Despite identifying these procedural shortcomings, the High Court refrained from mandating a new selection process. The decision was influenced by the looming deadline of July 15 for submission of the final team list for the Asian Games, which could have endangered India’s participation. Consequently, the High Court concluded the appeals without altering the selected team, while instructing EFI to adhere strictly to its criteria in future selections.
Previous Court Findings
Earlier, a single-judge bench of the High Court had dismissed the petitions by Agarwalla and Hajela, ruling that EFI’s selection process was consistent with the applicable guidelines. The Division Bench later acknowledged procedural discrepancies but chose not to disrupt the selection due to time constraints.
This legal challenge has garnered significant attention, as it underscores the importance of procedural integrity in sports administration.
