Article 21A: Supreme Court seeks Central government response on Amicus suggestion to make sporting activity a fundamental right

The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Central and State governments to respond to the suggestions made by the Amicus Curiae for declaring the right to physical activity and literacy as a fundamental right [Kanishka Pandey vs Union of India]. .A Bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao and BR Gavai asked the Central and State governments to respond to the suggestions that were put forth by amicus curiae Gopal Sankarnarayanan on plea seeking to declare the right to sports as a fundamental right for students."The Union of India and State governments are directed to respond to the listed suggestions made by the Learned Amicus, Gopal Sankaranarayanan. List after vacations," the order stated..The top court was considering a public interest litigation (PIL) petition which was filed in 2017 by a third-year law student. The main prayer in the PIL was for issuance of a direction to the Union government to formulate a high-level committee to suggest amendment of the Constitution to include Article 21A in its Part III, and a directive principle that shall state that the "State shall strive for promotion of Sports Education, sports values and sports culture as part of education". .The apex court had appointed Senior Advocate Gopal Sankarnarayanan and advocate Vanshdeep Dalmia to assist it as Amici Curiae. .When the matter was taken up on Monday, Sankaranarayanan proposed that the following three changes be implemented through a process of continuing mandamus by the apex court in order to implement the National Physical Literacy Mission:Amend Article 21A of the Constitution and the Directive Principles of State Policy to include the obligation on the State for promoting sporting activity, sports education, and sporting culture in India;Make necessary changes in policy to provide sufficient finances for conducting sporting activities;and Direct school administrations, education boards, etc. to implement the said policy. .The Amicus also raised concerns regarding the sensitivity and awareness among the youth regarding the sports and sporting culture. "We need physical literacy among the youth so as to avoid the usage of phrases like we used to hear before 'don’t throw the ball like a girl'," he said.He submitted that due to technology and the increase in the non-sporting activities, children are losing their concentration span. "Mount Everest is next to us but 99% of the people who are climbing the Everest are from the western countries. We don't have physical literacy to make our kids and youth strong enough to climb the Mount Everest," Sankarnarayanan said. .Mount Everest is next to us but 99% of the people who are climbing the Everest are from the western countries. We don't have physical literacy to make our kids and youth strong enough to climb the Mount Everest.Amicus Gopal Sankarnarayanan contended before the Supreme Court.He also stressed on the importance of a rights-based approach to include sports as a fundamental right which casts the obligation on teachers, schools, parents, municipalities and the state. "Implementation can take time, the Supreme Court can issue continuing mandamus. We can take small term and long term measures. Direction to CBSE/ICSE and all boards that they must allow 90 minutes to be there in school allocated for physical activity," he said. .He also advocated for curating e-learning platforms to inform all teachers, including Physical Education teachers about the importance of sporting activities.Further, he said concerns regarding the inclusion of differently-abled children. "The schools makes very little allowance for children with disabled and differently abled. This is unfortunate that these children are sidelined and they are discriminated. This is unfortunate. The small child must not feel that the world discriminates against them," the Amicus submitted..The Amicus mentioned the availability and accessibility of sporting facilities in the country, submitting that there is a huge divide between private and government schools regarding the same. He suggested that the Court can direct municipalities to allow local residents to use sports complexes for free."There are playgrounds in all neighbourhood parks and there are aunties who will say that “you cant play here because I have planted flowers”, he remarked. .During the hearing, Advocate Vikas Singh, appearing on behalf of the petitioner argued that promoting physical education would be helpful to inculcate a spirit of sportsmanship among children and have positive impacts on their mental health as well. "I have been given the example of Senior Advocate Shanti Bhushan by himself who went into depression. He started playing tennis and now he is out of it. The emphasis on sports is mental and physical activity. The children are only taught to win and not to lose. Sports should promote team building", Singh said. .As the hearing drew to a close, the Amicus said the following on a lighter note:"So this is also a generational gap like how we saw the judges defeated the lawyers in the Supreme Court Judges v. Bar Association match. The judges have retained their skills because they did not use phones and technological gadgets." "We don't know if it was fixed" the Bench responded in a lighter vein.Senior Advocate Vikas Singh then clarified, "The match was definitely not fixed". .The petitioner was represented by Senior Advocate Vikas Singh and advocate Satvik Mishra. Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj appeared for Union of India. .[Follow our coverage of the hearing]