Can’t Micro-manage BCCI Functioning, Says Supreme Court; To Pass Order On Tenure Of Office Bearers

BCCI is an autonomous body and cannot micro-manage its functioning, the Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday. It also asked the country’s top cricket organization why people over the age of 70 want to represent the nation in the ICC. The Supreme Court’s comments were made during the hearing on the board’s plea to amend its constitution with regard to the tenure of its office holders, including its President Sourav Ganguly and Secretary Jay Shah by extending the mandatory cooling-off period between terms of office. ​to purchase carriers about the state cricket associations and the BCCI.

The Supreme Court, which said the cooling-off period will not be dropped between office holders’ terms because “the purpose of the cooling-off period is that there should be no vested interests,” said it will continue the hearing Wednesday and continue to order.

Under the constitution adopted by the BCCI, an office holder must undergo a three-year cooling off period between two consecutive terms in the state association or the BCCI or both combined.

At the outset, Attorney General Tushar Mehta, who appeared before BCCI, told a bench of Judges DY Chandrachud and Hima Kohli that the game of cricket in the country has been streamlined considerably. He argued that the apex court has said that once the statutes go into functional readiness, some changes can be made with the leave of the court.

He said the BCCI is an autonomous body and all changes have been considered by the cricket body’s AGM. While the filing was being made, the bank said, “BCCI is an autonomous body. We cannot micro-manage its operation.” Mehta said: “Since the Constitution exists today, there is a cooling off period. If I am an office holder of the State Cricket Association for one term and BCCI for another consecutive term, then I have to enter a cooling off period”.

He added that both bodies are different and their rules are also different and two consecutive terms of office of the office holder are too short to develop grassroots leadership.

The Solicitor General said: “Leadership develops at the grassroots level and it remains in the state association. By then his time will come to be elevated to the BCCI; he must go for a mandatory three-year cooling off period. the BCCI if he is not an active member of the state association”.

He said, adding that the holding of the state position by a BCCI official should not be considered before the cooling off period.

While the submissions were being submitted, Justice Chandrachud warned: “We are in discussion and do not pass judgment. Social media thinks that whatever we say in court is judgment, but that is just dialogue to get a response and a better understanding of the facts.”

Thus, the bank said that a state association office holder cannot hold a position in BCCI without undergoing a three-year cooling off period under the existing constitution.

Mehta said the court’s concern is that no one should be in charge of the cricket body forever and that concern has been allayed by proposing a cooling-off period, after two consecutive terms in BCCI, so that the experience of “worthy administrators” goes. not lost.

He said the second amendment concerns the age limit of 70 on the board of directors for representation to the International Cricket Council, which the BCCI wants to get rid of.

The bank said: “Why should we have people over 70, let young people represent the country in ICC? We’re not saying people over 70 haven’t done an exemplary job, but it’s a sport. We have our attorney General , who is over 70, there are some doctors over 70 who do exemplary work in their field.”

Mehta said: “ICC is a council where it is decided which country gets how much money. There are tough negotiations going on between the veterans of the cricket organizations around the world. My young man will have to deal with these veterans, who have 30-40 years of experience in dealing with cricket”.

He added that there is no age restriction anywhere for ICC representation in any part of the world.

The bench said: “You mean to say that Cricket Australian Board of England and Wales Cricket Board have no age restrictions on ICC representation? Show us the recorded material. We have no material for us in regards to that You post it”.

The bank said it would continue the hearing on Wednesday and asked Amicus curiae’s senior lawyer Maninder Singh to collect all the details.

The bank said it will pass on the order.

Singh suggested that if a person has served a three-year term as an office holder of a state association, and then goes on to serve as an office holder in BCCI, he may serve two consecutive six-year terms. in the cricket body without a mandatory three-year cooling off period.

The BCCI has sought in its proposed amendment the abolition of a cooling off period for its office holders, allowing Sourav Ganguly and Jay Shah to remain in office as president and secretary, despite having spent six years with the respective state cricket associations.


Earlier, the Justice RM Lodha-led commission had recommended reforms in the BCCI that have been accepted by the highest court.

(This story was not edited by NDTV staff and was generated automatically from a syndicated feed.)

Topics mentioned in this article

Leave a Comment