The Union government’s budget allocation of ₹340 crore to National Sports Federations (NSFs) for the financial year 2024–25 comes at a defining moment for Indian sport.
With the grand vision of emerging as a global sporting force and even the distant possibility of bidding for the 2036 Olympics, the allocation reflects India’s intent to back its ambitions with real investment. Among the 13 federations funded this year ( as per data shared on a RTI ), the Paralympics Committee of India (PCI) received the highest single allocation of ₹22.71 crore, followed by the All India Football Federation (AIFF) with ₹8.78 crore, and several others like the All India Chess Federation (AICF), All India Sports Council of the Deaf, and Yogasana Bharat receiving between ₹4–6 crore.
The government’s commitment to inclusiveness is also evident in the funding of Special Olympics Bharat (₹2.81 crore) and niche traditional sports like Kho Kho and Yogasana. However, the key question is whether the rising budgets are translating into proportional sporting outcomes, especially when measured against governance quality, strategic planning, and actual on-field or international performance.
India’s para-sport ecosystem, for instance, has become the strongest argument in favour of sustained and targeted investment. The PCI’s record-breaking haul of 29 medals at the Paris 2024 Paralympics, which included seven golds and participation across 12 disciplines, is a striking example of what structured funding, athlete-centred programmes like the Target Olympic Podium Scheme (TOPS), and disciplined governance can deliver.
This remarkable outcome validates the government’s decision to prioritise para-sports in funding, and it highlights a crucial truth: when funding is matched by robust planning and athlete-first policies, results follow. A similar pattern emerges in chess, where the AICF’s relatively modest ₹5.2 crore allocation supports a federation that delivered unprecedented success, including double team gold at the Chess Olympiad and the historic rise of prodigies like Gukesh D.
The direct stipend programme (TNPSS) that covers over 70 young players shows how even limited budgets, if deployed strategically, can generate exceptional outcomes. Yet, governance issues threaten to overshadow these gains, with missing financial documents and high legal expenses leading to calls for a forensic audit of AICF’s finances a reminder that success on the board must be backed by transparency off it.
In contrast, the All India Football Federation (AIFF) presents a cautionary tale about how larger budgets alone are insufficient without clear strategy and governance. Despite receiving ₹8.78 crore the second highest allocation among NSFs the federation reduced its competitions budget by ₹20 crore last year, cut funding for youth teams, and faced governance challenges serious enough to prompt audit scrutiny. The discrepancy is stark: while grassroots participation has increased, especially in the women’s game (with a 138% rise in registered female footballers), the men’s and women’s senior teams continue to struggle internationally. The federation’s internal contradictions rising top-line budget, yet fewer resources for youth and competitions point to the risk that without strategic coherence, funding alone cannot fix structural weaknesses.
Volleyball, too, reflects how governance gaps can blunt the impact of funding: the Ad-hoc Committee Volleyball received ₹4.39 crore, yet trials continue to be self-funded by players, raising questions about inclusion and equity, especially for athletes from modest backgrounds.
Traditional and Emerging Sports: Modest Funds, Tangible Gains but Future Depends on Strategy
The funding for federations managing traditional sports and niche disciplines like Kho Kho, Yogasana, bridge, and billiards shows encouraging signs, yet raises questions about sustainability. The Kho Kho Federation of India (₹2.59 crore) has capitalised on the launch of the Ultimate Kho Kho League and the inaugural Kho Kho World Cup to draw audiences running into millions.
Beyond mere entertainment, this commercial exposure helps create a professional pathway for athletes in what was once seen as a purely rural or school-level game. Yogasana Bharat (₹4.89 crore) stands out as a unique blend of sport and cultural heritage: its inclusion in Khelo India events and inter-collegiate championships signals growing mainstream acceptance. The impact here is harder to measure in medals, but the participation data and visibility gains are real. However, the challenge ahead will be translating popularity into competitive excellence and robust national-level coaching systems, without which the sport risks plateauing despite strong cultural branding.
Smaller federations like the Bridge Federation of India (₹2.75 crore) and the Billiards & Snooker Federation (₹2.49 crore) deliver high returns on limited budgets, evidenced by international medals and increasing youth participation. For instance, bridge saw a 15% rise in registered players and multiple medals at the BFAME Championship and Asian Games.
Billiards and snooker produced continental titles and, notably, Dhruv Sitwala’s world ranking crown. These sports demonstrate that lower-budget disciplines can punch above their weight if athlete development programmes and national tournaments are consistent and professionally managed. The Indian Rugby Football Union (₹3 crore) and Handball (₹1.24 crore) show more modest returns; while domestic tournaments and participation at events like Khelo India keep the sports alive, the absence of major international breakthroughs suggests that funding here is maintaining activity rather than driving transformation.
Basketball, interestingly, represents a middle path: the Basketball Federation of India’s ₹4.75 crore allocation coincides with private partnerships, such as a professional league launched with ACG Sports and the establishment of a National Basketball Academy with Manipal University. India’s qualification for the FIBA Asia Cup 2025 further indicates that combining limited government funding with private investment can accelerate professionalisation and competitive progress. However, like other sports, sustained success will depend on consistent grassroots pipelines and governance reform.
Across all these federations, a pattern emerges: where funds are targeted to player stipends, grassroots competitions, and coaching, federations achieve visible progress. Conversely, where funding is absorbed by administrative spending or fails to reach athletes directly, impact is blunted.
What ties the entire picture together is the central role of governance. The PCI’s medal success is inseparable from disciplined, inclusive planning; chess’s international breakthroughs are built on structured support despite governance concerns; AIFF’s struggles highlight the risk when governance lapses overshadow growth potential; and sports like volleyball and handball show that even with funding, lack of stable leadership and strategic clarity limits results.
The government’s revised NSF norms requiring federations to allocate 20% of budgets to grassroots programme, invest 10% in coach development, and appoint High-Performance Directors—are steps towards bridging the gap between allocation and impact. But real change depends on strict enforcement, independent audits, and performance-linked funding. Only when federations prove that each rupee directly strengthens athletes, competitions, or coaching systems will India’s rising sports budgets truly translate into medals, higher participation, and a culture where sport becomes a viable career path.
In conclusion, the 2024–25 NSF allocations reveal a landscape of ambition supported by public investment, yet unevenly matched by outcomes. Some federations turn modest funds into world-class performances; others, despite larger budgets, struggle with strategy and governance. As India looks to the next decade and the distant dream of hosting the Olympics the challenge is clear: move beyond funding as an end in itself, and insist on transparent, athlete-first systems where investment is measured not just in crores allocated, but in medals won, grassroots talent nurtured, and inclusive sporting growth delivered nationwide.
Inputs from Gaurav U. Gullaiya
