WHAT IS THE CASE ABOUT?

The RM Lodha Committee report on reforming the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) had suggested several provisions, two of which the BCCI had opposed. The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to review these. All you need to know

THE PROVISIONS?

The two contentious clauses are the one-state, one-vote norm and a cooling off period for office-bearers before they contest a board election

Two states, Maharashtra and Gujarat, have multiple votes: Mumbai, Cricket Club of India, Vidarbha and Maharashtra in the case of the first, and Gujarat, Saurashtra, and Baroda in the second. The two states get more share of BCCI money

BCCI’S OPPOSITION

The board’s position was that members would be deprived of voting rights that they have been entitled to for decades, and that the cooling-off clause would affect continuity in administration

WHAT THE SC SAID

The court said it could reconsider Lodha panel’s one vote recommendation, and there need not be a cooling off period if office-bearer wants to contest a different post

WHAT LODHA SAID

“I have been

very clear that these suggestions, which have the seal of the court, are the heart and lungs of the reforms. If they are in any way modified, the very efficacy of the reforms would be lost.”