Members were not happy with the kind of thing that has happened," Patel said here. "BCCI rules and regulations and memorandum is very clear. The Board is functioning under the superintendence (authority) of the president. The entire Board is together on the issue.
That is why, the issue was discussed in the AGM and the members have shown their displeasure," he added. Manohar had submitted an affidavit in the high court to clear his name from the cases filed against the BCCI by the Enforcement Directorate. Giving relief to him, the court on August 7 quashed and set aside a notice issued by ED directing Manohar to appear before the agency over allegations of foreign exchange violations in the 2009 IPL tournament held in South Africa. A division bench of Chief Justice Mohit Shah and Justice MS Sancklecha, while quashing the ED notice, observed that ED had not considered the material placed by Manohar before it. The ED, on June 6, 2013, had issued notice initiating adjudication proceedings against Manohar under the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) regarding a bank account opened in South Africa by BCCI and IPL ahead of the cricketing event. The agency had issued the notice asking the former BCCI president to appear before them, pursuant to a show cause notice sent earlier to Manohar. "The agency had not considered the material placed by Manohar before it stating that he was not involved in the opening of the bank account and that he had advised the IPL governing council to inform the RBI before opening an account," the bench said.
The bench directed the agency to reconsider the material submitted by Manohar and pass a reasoned order before issuing a notice asking him to appear. On a request from Additional Solicitor General Kevic Setalvad, the court stayed its order for a period of four weeks. According to ED, $50 million were transferred to the bank account in South Africa. Patel, reacting to local news reports that Manohar had blamed current president N Srinivasan, who was re-elected last Sunday for a third year at the Board's AGM, for several acts of omission and commission during his tenure when Srinivasan was Board secretary, pointed out that it was a collective responsibility of all office bearers. "I have not gone through the report but some media friends have told me and I was busy right through the morning (with marketing committee meeting)," Patel said. "I would like to say nothing more except that if any ex-BCCI official, before making any remarks about their colleagues on the Board, should have considered that BCCI is running with (the help of) all the office bearers. "My personal view is that it is always the collective responsibility of all office bearers. One cannot absolve himself by leaving aside the others. I don't know much in detail about the issue but that is the only thing I can say," Patel said. He said Board will not react immediately to Manohar's views aired through a newspaper. "Nothing. Not right now. That thing is not possible in a day. This is just a media information. We will wait for the official remarks if it is available from Shashank Manohar. Then we will see. "But Shashank Manohar is an ex-president, we can easily talk with him. It is not that we are not on talking terms. He is a good friend of mine," he added.