The court said that the BCCI must put an end to all its controversies and move to conduct the election
Supreme Court's suggestion bars Mr Srinivasan from standing for another term as BCCI chief until the case reaches its conclusion as he is the only one named in the Mudgal report who is also a BCCI office-bearer
New Delhi: The Supreme Court was harsh on the BCCI while hearing with the betting and spot-fixing case on Thursday. “Why should we take action? You must yourself take the decision. There is no need to be defensive on the issue. We will give you the opportunity. Take a call on the issue. The BCCI must put an end to all the controversy,” the bench said.
“Let all the persons involved in the controversy step aside and election be conducted for the board and let the new board take a decision,” the court said.
In effect, the Supreme Court’s suggestion bars Mr Srinivasan from standing for another term as BCCI chief until the case reaches its conclusion as he is the only one named in the Mudgal report who is also a BCCI office-bearer.
The judges observed that the difference between Mr Srinivasan’s role as BCCI president and his interest as an owner of an IPL team was “obvious”, and asked: “If there are so many anomalies, why can’t the BCCI act according its rules and disqualify CSK?”, adding: “What is more valuable to Mr Srinivasan? Is it his office or his team?”
The court said that the BCCI must put an end to all its controversies and move to conduct the election because “the life of the BCCI board is over”. Any decision around the findings of the Mudgal probe “must be taken by a board which is legitimately in place and not a board which exists due to fortuitous circumstances,” the judges added.
Justice Thakur pointed out the distinction between Mr Srinivasan and India Cements “is getting to a vanishing point”. The court, for the first time, accepted that Mr Srinivasan’s son-in-law, Gurunath Meiyappan, was a CSK official. It sought further details about India Cements, its board and whose decision it was to invest the Rs 400 crores required in the CSK franchise.
“Is the company selecting the team?... If Gurunath Meiyappan is not the real owner, then who is the ultimate controller, we wish to learn.”“The process of selecting the team members and captain may not be directly but indirectly taken by Meiyappan through his wife, who is a member of the India Cements board, having a stake in the company. He might be the ultimate controller of the team though he has no stakes in the company. We would like to know the composition of the board members of the company.
We would like to know the shareholding of the company and the stake of Srinivasan and his family in the company. Who are the people who took decisions on behalf of the company regarding CSK? We are looking for real owners of the CSK.” BCCI counsel Aryama Sunderam sought time for getting instructions from the board on the election and also sought constitution of a “disciplinary committee” to punish those found guilty in the Mudgal report. The court, however, made it clear that a new board where parties involved in the case could not contest would have to take up the matter to be “above bias”.
( Source : dc correspondent )
Next Story
