Latest news with #PremtoshKumarMishra
Hindustan Times
07-08-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Delhi HC seeks Centre, BFI, IOA reply on pleas challenging boxing federation polls
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Thursday sought the response of the Boxing Federation of India (BFI) interim committee and the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) on pleas challenging the BFI interim committee's decision to conduct elections on August 21. The court also asked the union sports ministry, represented by standing counsel Premtosh Kumar Mishra, to file its response. The Boxing Federation of India (BFI) interim committee announced August 21 as the date of the polls. (Representative photo) A bench of justice Mini Pushkarna was hearing pleas filed by four state boxing associations—Delhi, Himachal Pradesh, Gujarat, and Madhya Pradesh—and fixed August 18 as the next date of hearing. 'Issue notice. Considering the sensitivity of the nature and urgency expressed by the parties, it is directed that the present application shall be taken up for final hearing before the next date of hearing. Any elections that are held shall be subject to the outcome of the present writ petition,' the court said in its order. The elections were initially scheduled for March 28, but due to the failure to conduct them, the federation is currently being managed by a six-member interim committee. This committee was formulated by World Boxing on April 7 and was chaired by Ajay Singh. Singh issued a notice on July 31 for convening an annual general meeting (AGM), calling for fresh nominations from the state units based on a World Boxing-approved constitution. The new constitution mandates that the contesting candidate be 'an elected member of the State/Union Territory (UT) member association during the election AGM duly notified to BFI and in presence of BFI observer.' It also announced August 21 as the date of the polls. Also Read: HC expresses concern over BFI's internal disputes The Delhi Amateur Boxing Association (DABA)'s petition, also seeking to stay the polls, said that the entire electoral process is illegal since it is based on a new constitution, which was unilaterally amended without following the mandatory ratification process. 'The conduct of the elections as presently notified is in breach of the high court's March order (stayed BFI's notification restricting electoral participation to elected members of affiliated state units) but also raises serious concerns regarding transparency, procedural regularity, and adherence to the binding framework governing the National Sports Federation (NSF's),' the petition said. Additionally, the Himachal Pradesh, Gujarat, and Madhya Pradesh boxing associations, in their petitions, have also challenged the amended constitution, asserting that it was promulgated without authority, ratification, or adherence to the legal framework. The three state units, in their petition argued by advocate Chaitanya Mahajan, have also contended that the formation of the interim committee is flawed, as it was constituted in violation of World Boxing's directive requiring the inclusion of a nominee from the IOA. Also Read: SC sends Anurag Thakur, others to Delhi HC following dispute over BFI elections The BFI interim committee, represented by senior advocate Amit Sibal, opposed the petitions, asserting that the new constitution had been approved by World Boxing and accepted by 30 out of 34 state boxing associations. Sibal said that the interim panel had commenced the process for conducting the polls after notifying the electoral college. 'Only four associations are in dissent because they want unelected persons to be parachuted into sports administration, which is against the constitution and spirit of the new sports bill. People today in the union sports ministry (MYAS) have acknowledged the principle that we can't have persons parachuted, however influential they might be in the government, and get MYAS to support them,' Sibal added. The interim panel on Wednesday disqualified Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) lawmaker Anurag Thakur and Rohit Jainendra Jain from contesting as presidential candidates in the upcoming BFI elections. While Thakur was nominated by the Himachal Pradesh Boxing Association, Jain was nominated by the DABA. Both Rohit and Thakur were found in violation of Article 20(iii) of BFI's constitution, which mandates the candidates to be 'an elected member of the State/UT member association during the election AGM duly notified to BFI and in presence of BFI observer.' Meanwhile, Singh resigned from the post of interim committee president on August 2 to run for a third term as federation president later this month, following which World Boxing designated Fairuz Mohamed as interim panel head. Justice (retd) Rajesh Tandon was appointed as the Returning Officer on Monday.
Hindustan Times
17-05-2025
- Business
- Hindustan Times
Dabur moves HC seeking protection from FSSAI's action over juice import, sale
Consumer goods company Dabur has moved the Delhi high court seeking protection from the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI)'s coercive action against the import and sale of its ACTIV fruit juice with the modified label of '100% no added sugar and preservatives'. Dabur's application is likely to be heard next week. The company said it modified its label from '100% fruit juice' to '100% no added sugar and preservatives' in compliance with FSSAI's June 2024 notification for its business continuity. It added that the regulator objected to the '100%' claim. In an affidavit filed in the high court last month, the FSSAI said the '100%' claim was presumably prohibited since it was neither defined nor recognised under the FSS Act or the FSS Claims Regulations, 2018. The FSSAI had directed all food business operators (FBOs) to remove the '100% fruit juice' claim from the labels and advertisements of Reconstituted Fruit Juices. Dabur's application said the company's representation to the FSSAI in February annexed the 'modified label'. It added that the FSSAI neither objected to the label nor refused to accept it. 'In light of the reply filed by the respondent No 2 [FSSAI] and the aforesaid incidence, the petitioner verily believes that the respondent No 2 may initiate action against the petitioner, even in respect of the current modified packaging, despite not having objected to the same on receipt of the representation on February 11, 2025,' the application said. The application said that Dabur commenced printing the modified label around March 7-10 and billing of goods with modified laminate in India on April 23, by when FSSAI filed its affidavit. The application was filed in Dabur's petition challenging the notification issued in June last year, arguing it violated its fundamental right to carry on trade or business and was causing operational hardships and branding loss. On April 2, the high court refused to pass an interim order staying the decision after the Union government's counsel Premtosh Kumar Mishra said that the law did not permit FBOs to use the term '100%' on the labelling, advertising, or marketing of food products, including fruit juices. He added that any claim of such nature was devoid of statutory recognition. The Union health ministry and the FSSAI told the court in April that the Food Safety and Standards (Advertising and Claims) Regulations, 2018, did not permit the use of the expression '100%' about fruit juices. The expression was held to be 'inherently misleading' that creates confusion in the minds of consumers and violates principles of 'fair disclosure' envisaged under the applicable law, the affidavit said. 'The absence of the term '100%' from the said schedule [V of the regulations], ipso facto precludes its usage in the labelling, advertising, or marketing of food products, rendering any such usage any such usage non est in law and contrary to the express intent of [the] regulatory framework.' In response, Dabur filed its rejoinder on Friday, saying the FSSAI, being an administrative body, did not have the legislative competence to amend Food Safety and Standards (Advertising and Claims) Regulations, 2018, and expressly prohibit the '100%' claim. The rejoinder added that the June last year notification 'singled out reconstituted fruit juices', which was irrational and discriminatory since other FBOs were being permitted to use the '100%' natural claims in respect of food items, including fruit juice mixes, ketchups, etc.
