The nomination of the powerful Maharashtra politician, Sharad Pawar, as “alternate director for International Cricket Council(ICC) meetings” and BCCI president Anurag Thakur’s role as representative of the Board in Asian and international cricket bodies are among the few violations cited by the Justice R.M. Lodha Committee to push for the “immediate” removal of the BCCI office-bearers by the Supreme Court.
In a 79-page status report filed on Wednesday, the Lodha Committee said reforms in Indian cricket were not possible unless the present crop of BCCI officebearers stepped down. The BCCI placed “impediments” to the implementation of the recommendations so as to “frustrate” the Supreme Court’s July 18 verdict to usher in transparency in cricket administration, it said.
The court was even more blunt after reading the report. Chief Justice of India T.S. Thakur asked whether the BCCI thought “they are a lawunto themselves?”“Well they are wrong... They behave like lords. Fall in line or elsewewillmake themfall in line,” he said.
The Bench gave the BCCI time till October 6 to respond to the status report.
Among other things, the committee wants the court to declare “non est and ineffective” all the decisions taken by the BCCI in violation of the verdict.
The status report’s focus is on the annual general meeting (AGM) held on September 21 at the BCCI headquarters. It said that even the minutes of the meeting were not handed over to the committee, which had to depend on a media advisory to know what had happened.
The committee found violations in several decisions taken at the meeting, including the unanimous election of Ajay Shirke as BCCI honorary secretary for the remaining part of the term; the appointment of the all-India senior selection committee (men and women); the authorisation of the BCCI president and secretary to appoint the ombudsman for 2016-17 as Justice A.P. Shah’s term had ended.
The report faulted the decision to let Mr. Thakur represent the BCCI in the ICC and the Asian Cricket Council. It said Mr. Pawar’s nomination as alternate director at ICC meetings was an aberration from the committee’s recommendations.
The report questioned the decision to have Mr. Shirke to represent the BCCI at the CEC meeting of the ICC. Most importantly, the report said, the BCCI went back on itsword to formally adopt the new memorandum ushering in transparency on September 28.As proof of this, the committee pointed out that the BCCI had not even issued directives to the member associations, despite express directions from the committee. It highlighted how the BCCI committed these violations even as its review petition against the July 18 verdict was gathering dust in the Supreme Court Registry.
It said no efforts were made by the BCCI to correct the defects and push for an early hearing.
