New Delhi: The Union government took the onus upon itself to ensure the Indian Super League’s stalled 2025-26 edition is organised and sought two weeks time from the Supreme Court to find a way.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the apex court on Friday that the government has taken stock of the crisis that the All India Football Federation faces after a failed tender process for monetisation of the top-most league.
He assured a special bench of Justices PS Narasimha and J Bagchi that the government is committed to provide relief to the players and clubs and would find a way for the tournament to be held.
Mehta said that the concerned minister is “fully aware” of the situation and have clarified that the “ISL must be held”.
“How it is to be held, what sponsors, who will finance, etc, can be left to the government. The government would intervene to ensure that the ISL is held and our players are not put to any disadvantage,” he said during the hearing.
“We will ensure that players are not put to any disadvantage due to lack of sponsors or lack of club owners.”
The government’s role, though, shouldn’t be too overbearing to give the impression of interference, the bench pointed out.
“We don’t want to put the impression that the government is again interfering. It is only to tide over the situation,” the justices said.
“Absolutely. Otherwise, we have no role,” Mehta agreed, adding the government will bear in mind that “anything being done should be in conformity with FIFA regulation so that we may not fall foul of that”.
Twelve ISL clubs had appealed to the Supreme Court for a speedy resolution while Sports minister Mansukh Mandaviya had met representatives of I-League clubs on November 13 in New Delhi and was apprised of concerns over the football season.
Rao report a pointer
Recommendations of Justice LN Rao, submitted to the Court last week, on lack of bidders for ISL’s commercial tender could serve as “very good guiding principles” for the government when it sits down with all concerned stakeholders for discussion, the Court said.
To prevent FIFA action on account of salary delay and operational suspension, Amicus Curiae Gopal Sankaranarayanan suggested the Centre to engage with clubs while also recommending a dialogue with the four potential bidders, who had attended pre-bid meetings.
The Court agreed on Mehta’s request for time to come up with a solution and said it would again hear the matter after two weeks, keeping in mind AIFF’s current 15-year commercial partnership with Reliance-subsidiary FSDL ends on December 8.
“You keep us informed, Mr Solicitor,” the Court said before adjourning the proceedings, while not making any observation on unwillingness of majority of AIFF’s state members to accept the contentious representation clause (Article 25.3) approved in its new constitution.
The AIFF, having pledged to submit an affidavit to the Court, has called for a special general meeting to vote on the disputed concurrent membership clause on November 24.