SGM held to undermine powers, hamper functioning: CoA to SC

The Supreme Court-appointed Committee of Administrators, has filed the ninth status report ahead of resumption of hearing of the implementation of the Justice R.M. Lodha reforms. It alleges that the status report has been filed “for the purpose of highlighting certain recent attempts by the office bearers and other persons to hamper the effective functioning of the COA”. The report informs the apex court that the Special General Body Meeting of the BCCI was convened to overrule every decision taken by the CoA and undermine its powers. “It attempted to subvert and frustrate the orders passed by this hon'ble court,” the reports says.

It urged the Supreme Court to urgently finalise the new constitution of the BCCI, finalise and amend constitutions of respective state associations, hold elections in each state association first, include former international players in their respective states, elevate existing memberships of associate members to full members.

The Supreme Court is set to hear the BCCI case on Thursday afternoon wherein it has to take a final call on matters related to 'one-state, one-vote', cooling off period and give green signal to a new BCCI constitution after looking at the one prepared by the COA in accordance with the Lodha recommendations and objections and suggestions made by the BCCI members on the same.

The crux of the report deals with the Special General Body Meeting convened on June 22 by BCCI office-bearers and members. This was despite the CoA warning the office-bearers that they could not hold the SGM and also that no BCCI employee would be made available to assist them in the SGM. It also told BCCI members that the board would not bear the cost of the SGM. All 28 members came for the SGM in a show of strength and took part in the meeting where issues related to selection of Team India, fitness tests, National Cricket Academy, litigations, among others were discussed and resolutions passed thereof.

The notice for convening the Special General Body Meeting on June 22 was issued by BCCI acting secretary Amitabh Choudhary “in violation of directions issued by CoA”, the committee said.

Choudhary, in his letter to the CoA, had stated that the general body of the BCCI was within its right to take decisions related to policy and was, in fact, supreme. The status report reveals that the BCCI acting secretary has “finally signed player contracts only after the meeting held on June 22—eight months after the earlier contract—expired”.

The report alleged that “almost every decision of the CoA which is not palatable to office-bearers (and other like-minded people) is being characterised as matter of policy which according to them can only be taken by the general body”.

It also pointed out that copies of the BCCI handbook (on core principal and policies for administration of the BCCI ) and an operating process manual called the BCCI Manual were prepared by Deloitte on its instructions and circulated to every BCCI member. The latter details process for recruitments to the BCCI, sponsorships, commercial rights, appointment of vendors, among others. The BCCI SGM, CoA alleges, passed its own resolutions related to recruitments and sponsorships, ignoring these manuals. The CoA told the Supreme Court that no attempt was made to even consider these manuals and handbook in the SGM and, instead, proceeded as if “these did n0t exist”. This, the status report states, “clearly evidences an intention to deliberately ignore policies/processes put in place by CoA”.

The CoA has also informed the apex court through its status report, an attempt by the office-bearers to exclude Puducherry, Uttarakhand and Mizoram from the Ranji Trophy and other domestic tournaments. The BCCI in one of its SGM resolutions had restricted participation only to its existing members.

The CoA had ratified representation of Cricket Association of Pondicherry as the bonafide association representing the Union territory, the Bihar Cricket Association representing Bihar, and formed a Uttarakhand Cricket Consensus Committee which had representation from all claimant associations from the state.

The report also raises objection to the decision of the BCCI SGM which authorises only the acting secretary and no other person including employees to proceed with legal matters on behalf of the BCCI. It alleges that this decision “prima facie hampers the CoA and the BCCI management to effectively supervise management and administration of the BCCI”.

This, according to the CoA, “is in direct contravention of orders passed by the SC in terms of which CoA is required to supervise management of the BCCI and administer it through the CEO”.