SC warns BCCI against prolonging implementation of Lodha panel report

The Supreme Court today warned the BCCI against attempts to “filibuster” or prolong the implementation of Lodha panel report that recommended sweeping changes in the structure, management and functioning of the Board by raising several objections and made it clear that only few of the recommendations may be referred back the panel for reconsiderationThe bench was angry that the BCCI. The Supreme Court today warned the BCCI against attempts to “filibuster” or prolong the implementation of Lodha panel report that recommended sweeping changes in the structure, management and functioning of the Board by raising several objections and made it clear that only few of the recommendations may be referred back the panel for reconsideration The bench was angry that the BCCI even objected to the ban on ministers as members of the Board and appointment of CAG to its governing council “Are your rules so sacrosanct that not even the Supreme Court can intervene? The bench expressed surprise that even two months down the line the report had not been implemented and it was just being discussed When the BCCI argued that “our views were not sought before recommendations finalized and said there would be unintended adverse impact and consequences of several changes in the memorandum, rules and regulations of the members of the BCCI, including those regarding grants, affiliation and recognition, the bench shot back saying “ you may find fault with recommendations but do not say you were not heard or that the recommendations came as a bolt from the blue”. The BCCI contended that democratic principles of permitting choice of an administrator and representatives ought not to be curtailed, rules like age cap and cooling off period would hamper continuity of meritorious and deserving administrators and impact the development of the game, ban on ministers and government servants from holding honorary posts in sports were contrary to freedom of association and patently unreasonable restriction on the rights of such individuals and some of the state associations will lose their voting power under the one state, one vote suggestion Virtually raising questions on how it managed its finances, a bench headed by Chief Justice also directed the board to submit a chart on amount it allocated to different state associations in the past five years.