BCCI to appeal on ‘one state, one vote’ clause again at Supreme Court | cricket | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Jul 27, 2017-Thursday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

BCCI to appeal on ‘one state, one vote’ clause again at Supreme Court

The BCCI’s special committee have felt that ‘one state, one vote’, cooling off period, balance of power between elected office-bearers and professionals are genuine difficulties for the Indian cricket Board to implement.

cricket Updated: Jul 08, 2017 22:15 IST
HT Correspondent
BCCI officials have decided to appeal on some of the clauses in the Lodha Panel report  in the Supreme Court on July 14.
BCCI officials have decided to appeal on some of the clauses in the Lodha Panel report in the Supreme Court on July 14.(AFP)

The special committee constituted by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) during its last Special General Meeting finally made some breakthrough and have zeroed in on clauses which they will urge the Supreme Court to reconsider as far as the Lodha Committee report implementation is concerned.

The marathon five-hour meeting here on Saturday was conducted without Sourav Ganguly and TC Mathews, who are out of the country. The committee felt that ‘one state, one vote’, cooling off period, balance of power between elected office-bearers and professionals are genuine difficulties for BCCI to implement.

As far as the one-state-one-vote is concerned, BCCI’s acting secretary Amitabh Choudhary said: “The special committee most humbly considered all aspects of it and thought the order may be reconsidered with a view that the present members of the BCCI continue to remain members. At the same time, enroll new members including those from the North East after following the due process.”

Choudhary wants the Supreme Court to consider doing away with the cooling off period for office-bearers and the Apex Council members. “Considering the fact that a cap has been placed of nine years, the committee thought that the matter of cooling off period may be put in abeyance. The cooling off also applied to the Apex Council members. So the committee felt that if the cooling off qualification on office-bearers can be done away with, it should also be the same with the members of the Apex Council,” said Choudhary.

“The third is the functions as set out between the elected office-bearers and the professional appointees. That needed a review. I can’t go into the details. It is a fairly vast set of functions and power of different functionaries,” added Choudhary.

There has been some tension between the BCCI office-bearers and the CEO Rahul Johri, who reports to the Committee of Administrators.

The special committee has accepted the 70-age cap after a few deliberations and the three-member selection panel. However, this is only half job done as the BCCI will have to call another Special General Meeting to approve the special committee’s views. The bigger question now is whether the BCCI can call an SGM before the Supreme Court order slated for July 14.

“Don’t worry about that (SC date). We will go before that. Logically speaking it should go to the general body again. We will issue the notice (SGM) soon,” said Choudhary.

Choudhary is hopeful that the Supreme Court will consider their plea. “It is not a question on the confidence within the BCCI, it is more to do with actual ground difficulties which we want to bring to the notice of the Supreme Court. It is not that we don’t like something. It is actual, genuine difficulties. “I cannot say it was not brought to the SC notice at all. But if this matter is brought to their notice separately after the end of a long exercise, I am sure it merits consideration,” he said.