In a big relief to the racing fraternity, Justice Bopanna on Friday directed that racing activities which had come to a standstill since September 1 should be expeditiously resumed in about 10 days` time by creating any monitoring committee including eminent persons and giving the government absolute discretion to impose conditions in public interest.

Justice Bopanna said that the licensing authority can create any monitoring committee including of eminent persons/persons who have held or holding high offices. The representatives of the Turf Club such as Stewards is to be constituted, the composition of such committee be done in consultation and in that regard, take a decision in accordance with law.

The Judge said that while considering the application, the competent authority shall hold discussion/consultation by way of hearing the representatives of the Turf Club and consider as to whether to protect the public interest of all the parties including the other petitioners such as the horse owners, trainers and employees of the turf club, the license is to be issued imposing conditions to regulate the same. Since the government has not yet considered the application for grant of the license, the petitioners had approached the court when the matter was not yet in the stage of judicial review, the Judge observed.

This in effect means that the government has absolute discretion to impose any condition to granting the license. Or worse, the government may even reject the application. The government if it so desires can form a committee to run racing on the lines of the submission made by the Advocate General. And as such, the order gives absolute power to the government to decide the issue of licensing, putting the club at the mercy of the government. The club has lost more than it has gained. In the light of the acrimony between the club and the government, the powers of the club are bound to be effectively diluted.

The Bangalore Turf Club counsel Naganand submitted to the court on Thursday that the club was open to the addition of more government-appointed members on the committee to oversee racing. He had argued that the turf club had been conducting racing from time immemorial and doing so following all procedures. He also said that the club had not been served notice or given any show cause. The club had been submitting the application for the license to conduct its activities in the same format as before. The government had denied the license because of the rejection of membership to 50 government nominees and that the club was being victimized. The club was agreeable for any conditions to be imposed for granting the license. He pleaded that in the interest of justice and equity, a direction in the form of a mandamus was sought for.

Advocate General Madhusudan Naik told the court that the club had not made any application in the required format for the sanction of license to conduct racing. The application dated November 17 was for the conduct of off-course betting and elaborately explained that there was no application for the government to consider and the club was seeking a writ of mandamus on an imaginary application. However, he said, keeping this issue aside, if the club was agreeable for racing to be conducted by the committee to be appointed as recommended by the court, he would ensure that the license was given to the club in 10 days` time. There has been tremendous rot in the way racing was conducted at present and this had to be set right by induction of a government committee to bring about changes and make the system transparent. There was an ongoing CID enquiry. The gullible racing public was being taken for a ride and that they were being exploited, he had contended. There was a previous precedent for a government body running racing at Chennai for 10 years under a retired a Supreme Court Judge, he had said.

The advocates for the trainers` association and the employees` society pleaded for the resumption of activities stating any further delay in resumption of activities would only escalate the problems and the survival of those dependent on the sport would be threatened. Their advocates said that they were not interested who ran the show but were only interested in the resumption of the sport. This is a battle between the government and the club and the victims were the people dependent on the activity and as such, pleaded for a favourable order from the court.

The Judge said that in the above background, ``though a detailed consideration would be necessary in that regard, for the present, insofar as the interim prayer sought, the fact that the racing activities is to be conducted on adhering to the Licensing Rules 1952 cannot be in dispute. If that be the position, the respondent-government is the competent authority which is required to consider the application in accordance with the Rules. Rules 3 (A) provides for the application to be filed in Form No 1(A) and on receipt of the application the consideration is to be made under Rule 5 thereof which provides that the Government may call for a report from such authority as it thinks fit and after such enquiry as it deems fit, if satisfied of the desirability of granting a license, grant such license. ‘`

``In the said background, the learned senior counsel for the petition would seek for interim direction to permit them to carry on the racing activity, it need be by imposing conditions. The petitioners have approached this Court in a situation where the application had not yet been considered by the respondent-Government. Hence, it is not in the stage of a judicial review of the action taken. It is no doubt true that the respondents have put forth certain contentions seeking to justify their action for non-consideration of the application. Yet, a consideration of the application in the usual course at the outset is required to be made by the competent authority and only thereafter any further consideration by this court would arise,`` the Judge said.