The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) doesn’t have any other way to resist the Lodha panel suggested recommendations. The Supreme Court today has taken a strict action against the board. Today’s verdict stated that BCCI has to implement all the reforms recommended by the Lodha committee.
The SC was dismissing the board’s plea for review of the July 18 verdict. The review petition asked for an open hearing and said some of the reforms were not logical.
SC’s decision to dismiss the plea was taken on November 10, it only came out on Tuesday. A bench of Justices TS Thakur and SA Bobde said, “We have examined the grounds urged in support of the prayer for review. We find no error apparent on the face of the record to warrant a recall of our order dated July 18, 2016. The review petitions are, accordingly, dismissed.”
The cricket board opposed the reforms on the ground of the implementations were impractical and the court did not have the right to interfere in the functioning of a private body. It also claimed that the reform one-state-one-vote would encourage the horse trading and influence the non-cricket states like those in the north-east to promote the horse trading.
The reforms include setting up the age limit of 70 years for the office bearers, barring ministers and bureaucrats from the board’s membership. The court also said a maximum of three terms for BCCI members, each of three years with the caution that there would be a cooling-off period between two terms. On July 18, the SC passed the order to clean up the gibberish from the Indian cricket body.
BCCI was not happy with the order and it filed review petitions asking the SC to reexamine the order. Generally, the bench in chamber decided the review petitions without giving an opportunity to par ties to argue the case. However, the court dismissed BCCI’s review petition.
The court said on banning the ministers and bureaucrats, “Nothing which is not due to the game and is not legitimate need be done by any minister or civil servant. But we have no manner of doubt that what is legitimately due to the game will not be denied to the game merely because ministers or civil servants do not happen to be office bearers. We know that there may be an overwhelming number of ministers and bureaucrats who are passionate about the game and would like to do everything that is legally permissible and reasonably possible.”
The apex court ordered that if any member of BCCI would become a minister or acquiring membership of any other sports body then the member would lose the membership. In its 143-page report, the court alleged that BCCI might be a private body but it could not claim a fundamental right under 19(1)(c) to administrate a sport.