SC PULLS FINANCIAL PLUG

The Supreme Court on Friday rapped the BCCI president Anurag Thakur for trying to create a record in order to question the legitimacy of the recommendation of the Lodha Committee for the appointment of a CAG nominee after the recommendation was accepted by this Court on July 18.

In its order a threejudge Bench of Chief Justice T.S. Thakur and Justices A.M. Kanwilkar and D.Y. Chandrachud said that prima facie directions of this court have been ignored, actions have been taken to present a fait accompli to the Committee, the directives of the Committee have been breached, and member associations have not been duly intimated about the directions of the Committee and the timelines fixed by it.

The Bench took exception to Anurag Thakur seeking clarification from ICC and said it is a matter of serious concern that the president of BCCI, even after the declaration of the final judgment and order of this court requested the chairperson of ICC for a letter “clarifying” the position which he had taken as BCCI president to the effect that the induction of a CAG nominee would amount to governmental interference and may result in BCCI being suspended from ICC.

The Bench said there was no occasion for the president of BCCI to do so once the recommendation of the Committee for the induction of a CAG nominee was accepted in the final judgment of this Court. This finding which is contained in the final judgment and order of this Court binds BCCI.

Prima facie, an effort has been made by the president of BCCI to create a record in order to question the legitimacy of the recommendation of the Committee for the appointment of a CAG nominee after the recommendation was accepted by this court on July 18.

The Bench while pointing out that the stand of Ratnakar Shetty was at variance with Anurag Thakur said “We presently defer further consideration of the action to be taken with reference to his conduct. Mr Shetty in his response to the status report claims that the CEO of ICC had “falsely” stated in his interview that the president of BCCI had requested ICC to issue a letter stating that the intervention of this Court amounted to governmental interference.

“The version of Mr Shetty is at variance to what is alleged to have been stated by the CEO of ICC. It may also become necessary for this Court to assess the veracity of the version of Mr Shetty and that of Mr Richardson.”

The Bench asked Shashank Manohar, chairman of ICC and the then president of BCCI to file his response setting out his version, to set the record straight. “Mr Manohar is at liberty to obtain a report from Mr Richardson before filing his response.”

The Bench while taking away the financial autonomy restrained the BCCI forthwith from making any disbursement of funds for any purpose whatsoever to any state association until and unless they adopt a resolution undertaking to implement the recommendations.

The court asked the Lodha Committee to appoint an independent auditor to scrutinise and audit the income received and expenditure incurred by BCCI.

Further directions will be issued on December 5, the court said.