oppn parties BCCI Legal Panel: Only Advisory in Nature for the Board

News Snippets

  • Supreme Court questions the continuing relevance of two-child norms. The Court observed that falling fertility rates have weakened the population-control rationale behind laws disqualifying people with more than two children from contesting local body elections. It referred the issue to a larger Bench for consideration
  • Supreme Court declines to shift Tirupati laddu case outside Andhra Pradesh. The Court rejected a plea seeking transfer of the trial, despite arguments that political statements by Andhra Pradesh's Chief Minister and Deputy Chief Minister could affect the fairness of proceedings
  • Supreme Court transfers Azam Khan's fresh ED bail plea to Allahabad High Court. The apex court declined to consider the Samajwadi Party leader's bail request in a fresh Enforcement Directorate case and directed that it be listed before a division Bench of the High Court on November 16
  • Two killed in Delhi building collapse; contractor booked. Two bodies were recovered after a building collapsed in Chawri Bazaar. Delhi Chief Minister Rekha Gupta said the contractor had been booked and the concerned junior and assistant engineers suspended
  • Uttar Pradesh voter rolls show a 2.4-crore discrepancy. A difference of approximately 2.4 crore names has been reported between the state's panchayat and rural Assembly voter lists. The Election Commission has ordered the two sets of rolls to be matched
  • Gujarat announces 3% dearness allowance hike. The state government announced a three-percentage-point increase in dearness allowance for government employees and pensioners ahead of Diwali
  • Sensex and Nifty post their strongest single-day gains in months. The Sensex surged 2,008.61 points, or 2.60%, to close at 79,310.01, while the Nifty 50 climbed 576 points, or 2.40%, to 24,536.60. Financial and automobile stocks led the rally, supported by falling crude prices and renewed foreign investor buying
  • Maaya Rajeshwaran reaches WTA-level quarter-final. The 17-year-old Indian defeated Poland's Weronika Falkowska 6-4, 6-3, becoming the first Indian woman since Sania Mirza in 2012 to reach a quarter-final at a WTA Tour-level singles event
  • Tanvi Patri reaches Youth Olympics badminton final. The 15-year-old defeated Japan's Yuzuno Watanabe in the semi-final, assuring India of a medal and becoming the first Indian badminton player to reach the girls' singles final at the Youth Olympics
  • India beat Pakistan 3-2 in SAFF Championship. India defeated Pakistan in a closely contested match, having led 3-0 before conceding two late goals. The victory was reported as a significant result for India's second-string side
  • India beat Japan 4-1 to win a record sixth Asian Champions Trophy. India recovered from an early deficit to defeat Japan in the final at Mohali, extending its record as the tournament's most successful men's team
  • The Supreme Court issued notice to the Centre and the Election Commission on a petition challenging Section 16 of the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, which grants the CEC and Election Commissioners protection from legal proceedings for acts performed in their official duties. The petition argues that such blanket immunity could leave citizens without an effective remedy for alleged wrongdoing by the Commission
  • The Supreme Court told voters whose names were deleted from Delhi's draft electoral rolls not to be apprehensive about seeking re-enrolment through Form 6, after the Election Commission assured it that such applicants would not be prosecuted merely because their names had appeared in earlier rolls
  • Congress leader Rahul Gandhi opened the party's campaign for the 2027 Punjab Assembly elections with an Insaaf rally in Sangrur, Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann's home district, accusing the AAP government of failing to control drugs, gangster violence and corruption. Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge outlined six commitments, including a drug-free Punjab, protection of farmers, employment for young people and action against corruption
  • Rahul Gandhi accused the AAP government of running Punjab through a remote control from Delhi and questioned Bhagwant Mann's ability to tackle drug abuse, making personal allegations about the Chief Minister's conduct during their time together in Parliament
Stock markets on fire due to US results, Sensex gains 2008 points to reach its highest level in 8 months
oppn parties
BCCI Legal Panel: Only Advisory in Nature for the Board

By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2016-08-09 11:59:42

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Author of Cyber Scams in India, Digital Arrest, The Money Trap and The Human Hack
picture courtesy: currentaffairs.adda247.com

The BCCI still does not believe that it has to change its ways. Even after the Supreme Court has given its final order asking for implementation of the Lodha committee recommendations with some modifications, the Board is yearning for a fight. It has appointed a 4-member legal panel, to be headed by retired SC judge Markandey Katju, to study the order and advise it on its legal implications as well as to act as the single point contact with the Lodha committee. The Lodha committee, on its part, has been rumoured to have said that the BCCI-appointed legal panel has no locus standi before it and it will interact only with Board officials. That is as it should be. A legal panel appointed by the BCCI can advise its office bearers on the legalities and they can then appear before the Lodha committee. The panel itself has no official mandate to appear before the Lodha committee.

Further, the BCCI is just trying to prolong the inevitable. If it had felt the need for a legal luminary, or luminaries, to advise it, the time was when the case was being heard in the Supreme Court. The BCCI is rich enough to have appointed Katju and several other retired SC judges to advise its lawyers before they made submissions in court. In fact, it’s battery of lawyers included several legal ‘luminaries’. One is also sure that lawyers representing the BCCI must have consulted constitutional experts at each stage of the case and billed the BCCI fancy amounts for that. Hence, this latest BCCI panel is just a ruse to escalate matters and play for time. The BCCI mandarins are still thinking that its political-bureaucratic network will get it out of this mess (if fact, its former president and former political heavyweight Sharad Pawar is rumoured to have told them that he is “speaking to the highest authorities” in the matter). Katju himself has done little but to rubbish the apex court order without much legal basis. But he has to do that to please his employers. While accusing the SC of trying to gain popularity by assuming legislative functions in making the order, Katju himself is trying to get attention by advising the BCCI to approach the SC for a review of its order by a larger, or even a constitutional bench. His ground is that the SC cannot interfere in the matters of a private society. Katju has either not read the SC orders in detail or he has not understood it or he has deliberately tried to gloss over important sections of the order to please those who have hired him to advise them.

It is clear from the final order and the one before that (the one that led to the formation of the Lodha committee) that the apex court has a clear view on the matter. While recognizing that the BCCI is a private society, the court has repeatedly said that by virtue of performing many State functions, it cannot function as a closed club and is amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the High Courts. This was explicitly said by the court in the first order.

Once it is established that the BCCI is amenable to writ jurisdiction of High Courts and is performing functions which are public in nature despite being a private society, it no longer enjoys the same kind of immunity that other private societies do. It’s working and functions have to be transparent and accountable. It is handling enormous amounts of public funds and the public has a right to know how these funds are being put to use. It cannot function as a closed club. What Markandey Katju is saying about the Supreme Court decision on appointing the Lodha committee is obviously dictated more by the terms of reference of his appointment by the BCCI and less by legal wisdom. If BCCI had accepted the Lodha committee recommendations, there would have been no need for it to appoint a legal panel headed by Katju. But since it wants to further contest the Lodha committee, it wants Katju to pick holes in the SC judgment, which he is valiantly trying to do without much legal basis. There is one more angle to the issue. Katju is an outspoken person. He blogs regularly, is very active on social media, writes a few columns in both the print and digital media and calls press conferences at the drop of the hat. If he had felt the SC judgment on BCCI and the appointment of Lodha committee were bad in law or “unconstitutional” why did he not comment on the same till he was appointed to head the legal panel by the BCCI? Clearly, it is Katju’s brief to rubbish the judgment and the Lodha committee and he is doing it to only to be true to his job. One is sure that a larger bench, or even a constitutional bench, of the apex court will deliver the same judgment as has already been delivered by the Supreme Court.