The racing fraternity is delighted and so too are the racing buffs.   Justice A S Bopanna on Friday directed the government to form a monitoring committee including eminent persons who have held or holding high offices. Representatives of the turf club such as the stewards of the present committee and the composition of the committee be done in consultation and in accordance with law and resume racing in 10 days.

The fair and pleasing order brought the smile back on the racing fraternity, most small owners and the daily wage earners at the club, pleased that the racing operations at this premier centre will start before the year end.

On  Thursday, Advocate General Madhusudan Naik had told the court that BTC had not made any application in the prescribed format for the sanction of licence to conduct racing.  The application made on Nov 17 was for the conduct of off-course betting. The Advocate General explained as such there was no application for the government to consider and the club was seeking a writ of mandamus on an imaginary application. He, however said that keeping the issue aside, if the club was agreeable for racing to be conducted by the committee to be appointed by government as recommended by the court he would ensure that the licence was provided to the club in the next 10 days.

 It is clear from the order that the government still has the absolute discretion to grant or reject the application for licence and impose any conditions if they so desire. But the club is hoping that the government will not play spoilsport at this juncture and honour the court order. 

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 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.

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. ‘`