Delhi HC seeks WFI stand on Vinesh Phogat's plea against show-cause notices

[[{“value”:”

The Delhi High Court sought a stand from the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) on a petition filed by Olympian Vinesh Phogat challenging two show-cause notices issued against her and the consequential disciplinary proceedings.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that the High Court was not issuing a formal notice right now and asked the WFI counsel to obtain instructions. The matter will next be taken up on September 29.

Phogat has challenged the show-cause notices dated May 9 and June 17, alleging that they form part of a continuing course of discriminatory and mala fide exercise of disciplinary powers by the federation, which has allegedly affected her return to competitive wrestling after maternity.

The wrestler claims that although the International Testing Agency (ITA) cleared her to compete from January 1, 2026, the WFI adopted an eligibility system that sidelined her. She contends that the first notice relies on outdated anti-doping rules and a non-existent “Rule 56”, while also falsely raising an issue with her March 2024 trial participation, which had been authorised by WFI’s Ad-Hoc Committee.

Allegations of bias and lack of transparency

During previous legal rounds, the High Court had made prima facie observations regarding the initial notice’s validity, allowing Phogat to enter the Asian Games Selection Trials. However, her petition asserts that WFI subsequently modified its selection rules by adding a tournament in Gonda, Uttar Pradesh, to the qualification pathway without informing the Supreme Court during a May 29 hearing.

Following her objections during the May 30 selection trials, WFI issued a second show-cause notice on June 17 regarding her conduct. Phogat responded on June 30, calling the charges vague and highlighting that identical conduct by other wrestlers was ignored, demonstrating selective disciplinary enforcement.

Furthermore, Vinesh Phogat questioned the legality of the WFI Disciplinary Committee. She alleged that its details were only published online on July 30 after her formal objections, lacking official resolution dates, signatures, or letterheads.

In a parallel plea, Justice Sharma issued notice to the WFI, the Union Government, and the Indian Olympic Association (IOA), setting a hearing for November. This petition urges the creation of a transparent framework supporting female athletes returning from pregnancy, arguing that relying on events held during maternity leave penalises athletes for uncontrollable life events.

(With inputs from ANI)

“}]]