BCCI adjourns working panel meet over Srini’s presence
High drama was on Friday witnessed in the BCCI’s crucial Working Committee meeting over the presence of N Srinivasan, prompting the President Jagmohan Dalmiya to adjourn the meeting sine die over lack of legal clarity on the sidelined former chief’s status.
“The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) Working Committee meeting was adjourned sine die after deciding to seek the opinion of the Hon’ble Supreme Court whether <g data-gr-id="54">Mr.</g> N. Srinivasan could attend the meetings of the BCCI as the authorised representative of Tamil Nadu Cricket Association,” BCCI Secretary Anurag Thakur said in a brief statement.
The working committee was to discuss the report of the four-member working group on the roadmap for conducting the IPL in the wake of the two-year suspension of two franchises -- Chennai Super Kings and Rajasthan Royals -- by the Supreme Court-appointed Justice RM Lodha committee.
The meeting was postponed as the members argued over the presence of Srinivasan, who was earlier barred by the Supreme Court from contesting the BCCI President’s post following the IPL spot-fixing scandal.
In his defence, Srinivasan, who attended the meeting as President of the Tamil Nadu Cricket Association, placed Justice Sri Krishna’s opinion which said he was entitled to attend the meeting, an official who attended the meeting said.
But some BCCI members countered that argument and claimed that the Supreme Court had made it clear that he should stay away from BCCI meetings. “Since there was no clarity on the legal status of Mr Srinivsan, President adjourned the meeting after the BCCI legal adviser Ushanath Banerjee also said that he was not sure about Srinivasan’s legal standing as of now,” the official said.
The official said that Srinivasan was specifically told not to attend the meeting and among those who tried to dissuade him were IPL chairman Rajeev Shukla and BCCI Treasurer Anirudh Chaudhary. However, the Chennai strongman did not give in and attended the meeting.
Srinivasan tried explaining his stance to the BCCI members by insisting that there was no conflict of interest in his position as an administrator and as <g data-gr-id="61">owner</g> of Indian <g data-gr-id="60">Cements</g> -- the company which owned CSK.
The BCCI, it is learnt, has decided to call an emergency working committee meeting in the first week of September to finalise the date of its Annual General Meeting, which is likely to be held in Kolkata on September 27.
On Friday, the working committee was to discuss the Justice Lodha Committee report and the subsequent recommendations of the Working Group. The meeting was also set to deliberate on <g data-gr-id="50"><g data-gr-id="66">the the</g></g> Madras High Court order directing the BCCI, India Cements and others involved to submit their <g data-gr-id="51">counter affidavits</g> to the petition which has been filed by CSK Ltd.
The High Court has directed the parties to file their written submissions within a certain time period and the next hearing has been scheduled for September 23.
The two-time champions CSK had moved the Madras HC challenging the suspension. The first bench of the High Court had found the petition maintainable and issued <g data-gr-id="67">notice</g> to the Board of Control for Cricket in India.
Other key points on the agenda were the NCA committee recommendations on whether to keep the apex academy in Bangalore, discuss affiliation status of Chattisgarh, Bihar and Manipur and the technical committee recommendation among others.
Appointment of India’s next coach was not on the agenda but the working committee was to ask the Cricket Advisory Committee, comprising Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly and VVS Laxman to finalise the name.
On Thursday, the IPL Governing Council had recommended Having two news teams for the next two editions of Indian Premier League in place of Chennai Super Kings and Rajasthan Royals.
Ushanath Banerjee later told reporters that the matter of Srinivasan’s representation in the BCCI would be dealt with after legal consultation.
“The Board has taken the opinion of two former judges who were of the view that attendance of Srinivasan may invite contempt of court. So, on the ground of conflict of interest, the meeting was adjourned sine die,” he said.
“TNCA also obtained <g data-gr-id="56">opinion</g> of the former SC judge who said Srinivasan can attend the meeting. So to obtain the clarification on the honourable SC’s order, the Board decided to adjourn the meeting.