The Delhi High Court on Monday identified procedural lapses in the manner the Equestrian Federation of India (EFI) selected the country’s Dressage team for the 2026 Asian Games, but declined to alter the final squad, citing the limited time left before the official submission deadline.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia observed that the federation had failed to adhere to key provisions of its own selection policy. However, with July 15 being the deadline to submit the final team and the Asian Games fast approaching, the Court held that ordering a fresh selection process at this stage would be impractical and potentially harm India’s participation in the event.
The Bench stressed that judicial intervention at this late stage could adversely affect the nation’s prospects in the Dressage competition and, therefore, chose to exercise restraint in the larger interest of the sport.
The ruling came while hearing appeals filed by dressage riders Anush Agarwalla and Sudipti Hajela, who had challenged their exclusion from India’s squad for the continental event, scheduled to be held in Japan from September 19 to October 4, 2026.
The two riders had earlier approached the High Court after a single-judge Bench dismissed their petitions, concluding that the selection process was fair and consistent with the federation’s prescribed norms. Dissatisfied with that decision, they carried the matter before the Division Bench.
After examining the record, the appellate Bench found that the EFI had overlooked mandatory stages laid down in its selection framework. It noted that the federation did not prepare a list of “probables” before finalising the squad, as required under Clauses 15(a) and 15(b) of its selection policy. It also failed to publish the provisional merit list of those probable candidates, a step mandated under Clause 8(f).
Defending its actions, the EFI argued that time constraints prevented it from following every procedural requirement and maintained that conducting additional competitions among probable candidates would have served little purpose.
The Court was unconvinced by this explanation.
It remarked that the federation should have initiated the selection exercise well in advance so that the list of probable athletes could be prepared, training competitions conducted, and the final team chosen in accordance with its own rules. The Bench observed that the federation appeared to have rushed the process without following the prescribed procedure.
Even while criticising the shortcomings, the Court concluded that reopening the selection exercise at this stage would disrupt preparations and could jeopardise India’s participation in the Asian Games. On that basis, it refused to interfere with the selected team.
The Bench, however, issued a clear directive to the Equestrian Federation of India, stating that future selections must strictly comply with the federation’s notified criteria to ensure transparency and fairness in the process.
