BCCI gets SC relief on Lodha panel suggestions

NEW DELHI: The big impasse in Indian cricket is over with the Supreme Court approving the new constitution of the Board of Control for Cricket in India drawn up by the court-appointed Committee of Administrators and based on the court-appointed justice RM Lodha Committee’s recommendations, but setting aside two key changes that could have drastically reformed the way Indian cricket is run.

The court walked back the two changes it had signed off on in July 2016, the one-state-one-vote policy, and the so-called coolingoff period for office bearers between successive terms, both of which were opposed by BCCI. The justice Lodha Committee’s recommendations regarding these were driven by a desire to prevent concentration of power in the western states of Gujarat and Maharashtra, which had three votes each, and in a few individuals. With Vidarbha, Mumbai, and Maharashtra (the three associations in Maharashtra) and Baroda, Saurashtra, and Gujarat ( the three in Gujarat) retaining their votes, West Zone will likely continue to exert disproportionate control of cricket in India.

The Railways Sports Promotion Board (Railways), Services Sports Council Board (Services), and Association of Indian Universities have also been granted full membership -- the justice Lodha Committee had recommended that these, and National Cricket Club (Kolkata), and Cricket Club of India (Mumbai), not be granted full membership of BCCI. And officials can now continue for two terms in office, as against one earlier, before entering the threeyear cooling-off period.

The 90-year old BCCI has been directed to adopt the new constitution in a month’s time and file a report in the top court. State associations, too, have been directed by the court to change their constitutions “on similar lines within a period of 30 days after BCCI changes its rules”.

The court also increased the strength of the national selection committee back to five — the justice Lodha Committee had suggested reducing it to three.

Justice Lodha expressed his unhappiness at some of the changes: “While I wouldn’t say we are back to square one, I am not very happy as the fundamental structure of the reforms has been changed and affected. This is a weakened structure as compared to the one we had suggested.”

However, the court refused to revisit the Justice Lodha Committee suggestions on disqualification of BCCI members and insisted that no minister or government servant or anyone who is more than 70 years of age can hold a BCCI office.

Vinod Rai, the chairman of the Committee of Administrators, however, welcomed the court’s order in a response to the Press Trust of India. He said that he, too, had originally wanted a sixyear term for office bearers before the cooling-off period.

Setting up the justice Mukul Mudgal Committee in the backdrop of the 2013 IPL betting con- troversy, the Supreme Court observed “there is cloud over the working of the BCCI” and it has left followers of the game “worried and deeply suspicious about what goes on in the name of the game”. The committee submitted its report in November 2014. In January 2015, the Supreme Court-appointed a committee under justice Lodha to determine the punishment for those involved in the IPL betting scandal, and also suggest ways to reform BCCI. The committee submitted its report in January 2016. The Supreme Court accepted most of its recommendations in July of the same year.

After BCCI dragged its feet over implementing the changes suggested, the Supreme Court appointed the Committee of Administrators in January 2017. Indian cricket’s big impasse started then. In between, in August 2017, BCCI filed a review petition before the court. Thursday’s ruling by the court has hopefully ended the impasse, but has also walked back some of the justice Lodha Committee’s more radical reforms.

THE COURT ALSO INCREASED THE STRENGTH OF THE NATIONAL SELECTION COMMITTEE BACK TO FIVE