Supreme Court To Hear BCCI's Plea To Amend Its Constitution On Thursday
The Supreme Court is expected to hear BCCI’s plea to amend its constitution on Thursday. The case significantly affects the tenures of the chairman and office bearers of the Board of Control for Cricket in India.
The Board has contested the reforms suggested in the Lodha committee report. One of the Board's critical concerns is the recommendation for the period's cooling for Ganguly and Co. Although the Supreme Court had tweaked the original suggestion given by the Lodha committee, the BCCI does not want to accept the Court’s mandate.
The rationale for the 2018 verdict
The Lodha committee, in its report, had recommended that an office bearer - at BCCI or state association - would need to take a three-year break after serving one term of three years. This was heavily contested by the BCCI, which led the apex court to soften the original recommendation. The original mandate concerning the cooling-off period was modified by the D.Y. Chandrachud-led bench, thus allowing an office bearer to serve two consecutive terms (six years) separately at the state association or the Board or a combination of both while retaining the maximum tenure of nine years. The Court’s aim was simple. It wanted to ensure that the concentration of power did not remain in the hands of a few. "Cooling off must be accepted as a means to prevent a few individuals from regarding the administration of cricket as a personal turf. The game will be better off without cricketing oligopolies," Justice Chandrachud had noted in the 2018 verdict.
The Achilles heel for the BCCI
Although the Supreme Court went lenient with the original recommendation, it did not help the cause of the administrative body for cricket in India. The requirement as it stands today makes most of the office bearers, including Saurav Ganguly, ineligible to hold their post. For instance, Ganguly’s cooling-off period was supposed to begin after July 2020. The former India captain started his administration journey as a secretary of the Bengal Cricket Association in 2014 and was subsequently elected as its president in 2015. His re-election to the post in 2019 did not surprise many in the cricketing circles. However, he transitioned to the BCCI in October 2019. So, where does the predicament lie for the top brass of cricket’s governing body in India?
Well, the Ganguly administration wants the cooling-off period to come into effect after the office bearer had been in a post for six consecutive years at one place - either a state association or the BCCI but not a combination of both.
Besides the Board’s grudge against the cooling-off period, It also wants no interference from the court if it wants to alter the constitution at any point in time.
It will be interesting to see what the Justice Ramana-led Bench decides. The 2018 verdict is based on sound principles to prevent monopoly in the administration of cricket in India; whether it can be overturned or modified, well, all one can hope is cricket wins in the court of law.
