New Delhi: A second member of the All India Football Federation‘s ethics and dispute resolution committee has been forced to recuse himself from participating in hearings of Churchill Brothers vs Inter Kashi case on account of alleged conflict of interest, leading to absence of quorum and rescheduling of its final hearing.

A day before the matter was listed for part arguments on Saturday (21/3/26), Churchill sought recusal of advocate Sudarshan Agarwal, pointing to his previous role as counsel for AIFF president Kalyan Chaubey, and flagging “a direct” conflict of interest.

“It is pertinent to note that the AIFF was a party to the Petition filed by Churchill Brothers FC before the Hon’ble High Court and had opposed the said petition, even seeking its dismissal,” Aditya Barros Pereira, Churchill’s general manager wrote to the ethics committee.

“In these circumstances, when the same subject matter is now being examined by the Ethics Committee, the participation of the personal lawyer of the President of AIFF as a member of the Committee raises a serious issue of conflict of interest.”

As Churchill raised “serious objection”, advocate Sudarshan Agarwal became the second member of the four-member of AIFF’s ethics panel, after chairperson RK Pachnanda, who was forced to abstain from participating in hearings, which led to an absence of quorum on Saturday.

“For this reason, Mr. Sudarshan Agarwal has abstained from today’s hearing stating that until the application is disposed of it is not appropriate on his part to participate in the proceedings,” Ashok Tripathi, deputy chairperson of the ethics and dispute resolution committee, wrote in his order.

“It is revealed on the perusal of the application that Mr. Sudarshan Agarwal has been counsel for Mr. Kalyan Chaubey in his personal capacity and not in the capacity of President, AIFF.

“However, the Ld. Counsel for Churchill Brothers, however, kept on insisting that it is a case of direct conflict of interest, consequently, the provision of Article 73 of AIFF Constitution, 2025 is attracted, and hence Mr. Agarwal must recuse himself from the current proceedings.”

With Kashi having filed their response and Churchill submitting additional documents, the final hearing on the matter has now been fixed on March 30.

Delhi HC order

Earlier, Delhi High Court observed that committee chairperson RK Pachnanda shouldn’t preside over the matter on account of his earlier role of investigator as AIFF’s integrity officer.

Churchill had sought appointment of an independent chairperson to ensure “impartial adjudication” of their grievances, leading to Pachnanda’s absence from the hearing on Saturday.

As per Article 79.2 of AIFF’s disciplinary code, atleast three members are required to be present for proper quorum.

Initially a four-member committee, Pachnanda’s court-ordered recusal made it three and Agarwal’s recusal would make it two, raising the prospect of a new member to be drafted in.

Through his order on Saturday, deputy chairperson Tripathi, apart from setting the hearing date for March 30, observed that the order on Churchill’s recusal request application shall be notified to all parties in the meantime.

The deputy chairperson’s order would determine if the matter proceeds for further hearing before the same members or if fresh induction is necessary.