BCCI top panel takes tough stance, orders election of fresh office-bearers | cricket | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Apr 21, 2018-Saturday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

BCCI top panel takes tough stance, orders election of fresh office-bearers

The Committee of Administrators says in its status report to the Apex court that the current interim office-bearers are cashing in on the non-implementation of reforms in Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI).

cricket Updated: Mar 08, 2018 23:19 IST
HT Correspondent
If the Supreme Court agrees to BCCI top panel’s suggestion, it will be curtains for the current interim office-bearers, president CK Khanna, secretary Amitabh Choudhary and treasurer Anirudh Chaudhary
If the Supreme Court agrees to BCCI top panel’s suggestion, it will be curtains for the current interim office-bearers, president CK Khanna, secretary Amitabh Choudhary and treasurer Anirudh Chaudhary(AFP)

In its seventh status report filed by Board of Control for Cricket in India’s (BCCI) Committee of Administrators in the Supreme Court, Vinod Rai and Diana Eduljee have recommended the holding of the Annual General Meeting and electing fresh office-bearers.

If the Supreme Court agrees, it will be curtains for the current interim office-bearers, president CK Khanna, secretary Amitabh Choudhary and treasurer Anirudh Chaudhary. The AGM will also see the formation of a new IPL Governing Council, which will end the tenure of Rajeev Shukla as IPL chairman.

READ | BCCI acting secretary Amitabh Choudhary takes on administrators in new drama

Quoting the existing constitution of the BCCI, the status report states that the AGM shall be held every year, not later than September 30. Among the main business will be the election of office-bearers and vice-presidents from each zone, election of the working committee, standing committee and other sub-committees, which will seal the fate of the current set of office-bearers.

LONG-AWAITED

The last AGM was held in September 2016. The CoA had been waiting for the implementation of the new BCCI constitution before holding fresh elections but has now decided to go ahead with the AGM. “No BCCI AGM has been held since (Sept, 2016), although the deadline of September 30, 2017, has elapsed. As a consequence, the audited statement of accounts for the financial year ending March 31, 2017 along with the auditor’s report are yet to be adopted even as the financial year (ending March 31, 2018) is drawing to a close,” the CoA’s report states.

READ | Committee of Administrators running BCCI a black mark on cricket: Ian Chappell

Detailing the election dates of the current office-bearers, it highlights that the “term of the current office-bearers has expired on March 1, that is a period of three years from the date they were elected. Accordingly, there is a need to elect fresh office-bearers for BCCI.”

The report specifies that the “term of the senior most vice-president and the joint secretary have expired, they cannot continue to perform the duties of the President (CK Khanna) and Secretary (Amitabh Choudhary) respectively.”

It has clarified on the status of the IPL Governing Council as well. “The IPL GC shall be appointed by the General Body at every Annual General Body meeting of the Board and the term of the committee will be for a period of one year.

“In light of the aforesaid, there is a need to elect fresh Standing Committees, including the IPL Governing Council.”

READ | BCCI office-bearers contest Committee of Administrators plea for their sacking

NON-COMPLIANCE

According to the Apex Court’s directions and timeline issues, the AGM will have to be in keeping with the recommendations of the Justice Lodha Committee report. The CoA has submitted that even though the new BCCI constitution has not yet been formally adopted, elections can be conducted in terms of the recommendations of the Lodha Committee.

READ | Supreme Court hearing on BCCI reforms put off again

Their argument is that the current office-bearers need to be replaced for being guilty of non-compliance of the recommendations. “These interim directions are necessarily required so that the persons who are consciously guilty of non-compliance of the recommendations passed by the Hon’ble Court are disabled from benefitting from their conscious non-compliance, and in particular, do not get the benefit of an extended tenure because of such non-compliance.”