Mumbai: The Board of Control for Cricket in India appraised its state units of its stand on the National Sports Governance Act, stating that they have yet to be notified as a designated sport under the act. Consequently, the state units are currently mandated to conduct elections according to their existing constitution, just as the parent body - the BCCI held its AGM on Friday.
“Regarding the Sports Act, our stand is very clear,” the BCCI secretary Devajit Saikia said. “There are a lot of things which have to be done by the concerned authority. Once those exercises are completed and once the BCCI comes under the Sports Act, a particular notification has to be issued to make it a designated sport.”
It is understood that a number of Indian Olympic sports are keen to come under the purview of the Sports Act to benefit from government funding. At its AGM, the BCCI told its members that they were paying an average of ₹3000 crore annually in income tax. Recently, the Supreme Court sought clarification from the BCCI and concerned state units regarding why the terms and conditions of service for their office bearers should not be governed by the 2025 Sports Act.
Deep Dive
What is the annual income tax paid by the BCCI?
Why does the BCCI want to be notified under the National Sports Governance Act?
How does the BCCI generate its revenue?
“Whenever the notification comes, immediately we will spring into action. We will do our job as per the rules of the new Sports Act. To what was discussed in the Supreme Court that day, we will give the clarification on October 27, when the matter will be listed next time,” Saikia said.
{{/usCountry}}“Whenever the notification comes, immediately we will spring into action. We will do our job as per the rules of the new Sports Act. To what was discussed in the Supreme Court that day, we will give the clarification on October 27, when the matter will be listed next time,” Saikia said.
{{/usCountry}}In May, the Central Information Commission (CIC) had already ruled that BCCI does not fall under the definition of a “public authority” under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. The Commission noted that the BCCI was financially independent, generating its revenue through media rights, sponsorships, broadcasting arrangements, ticket sales, and other commercial activities.