Ranjit Bajaj takes AIFF to court over Secretary General’s appointment

Delhi FC director Ranjit Bajaj has filed a writ petition in the Delhi High Court against the All India Football Federation (AIFF), challenging the appointment of Anilkumar Prabhakaran as its Secretary General.

Bajaj argues that the appointment violates the National Sports Code, 2011, and is seeking legal intervention to remove Prabhakaran from his position.

The Bridge has access to the 53-page writ petition filed in the Delhi High Court, and these are the important points from the document.

Allegations of rule violation

The petition claims that Prabhakaran was elected as an AIFF Executive Committee member in 2022 later resigned and was appointed Secretary General in 2024.

This, Bajaj contends, is in direct violation of a 2022 directive issued by the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports (MYAS), which bars former executive committee members from taking up administrative roles in National Sports Federations.

The rule aims to prevent conflicts of interest and ensure fair governance in Indian sports bodies.

Bajaj points out that the same directive was enforced against the Table Tennis Federation of India (TTFI) in 2024, leading to the removal of its CEO, M.P. Singh, under similar circumstances.

However, no action has been taken against AIFF despite its alleged violation of the rule.

Conflict of interest

The petition also raises concerns about a potential conflict of interest, alleging that Prabhakaran had links to Scoreline Sports, a company that organised the Kerala Super League (KSL).

In 2023, AIFF granted a special exemption to KSL, allowing foreign players to participate, reportedly after a request from Scoreline Sports.

Bajaj argues that Prabhakaran’s appointment to AIFF while having past ties with the company raises serious ethical questions.

Legal demands

Bajaj has requested the Delhi High Court to issue a writ of quo warranto, challenging Prabhakaran’s authority to hold the position, and a writ of mandamus, directing MYAS to enforce its own rules against AIFF.

Writ of quo warranto is a legal action which challenges an individual's right to hold a public office, whereas writ of mandamus is a court order prohibiting an individual from conducting against the law.

Additionally, the petition seeks an interim suspension of Prabhakaran while the case is under consideration.

The case highlights ongoing governance issues in Indian football and AIFF’s repeated legal troubles.

If the court rules in Bajaj’s favor, it could set a significant precedent for enforcing accountability in National Sports Federations.

FIFA has historically opposed government or court interference in football administration, as seen in the case of Pakistan, where the Pakistan Football Federation (PFF) was suspended today for failing to adopt a revised constitution mandated by FIFA.