As the arguments related to justice RM Lodha panel recommendations entered its last round, the special bench of chief justice of India TS Thakur and FMI Kalifulla on Monday appointed senior counsel Gopal Subramanium as amicus curiae in the matter and sought his assistance in expediting the case.
As the arguments related to justice RM Lodha panel recommendations entered its last round, the special bench of chief justice of India TS Thakur and FMI Kalifulla on Monday appointed senior counsel Gopal Subramanium as amicus curiae in the matter and sought his assistance in expediting the case.
His appointment is seen as set back to the powerful Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) as he was the one who argued extensively during the spot-fixing case report made by justice Mukul Mudgal. This also means that with an eye on summer holidays, May 16 onwards, the apex court has made up its mind to finish up the matter well in time before that.
As the augments resumed, it was yet again Baroda Cricket Association's senior counsel Kapil Sibal continued from where he left. The court asked Sibal why all the state cricket associations have been resisting the reforms. "The Court can bring in reforms in the BCCI but no one can tell us (states) to be reformed. Is that all your are trying to say?" CJI Thakur asked Sibal.
To which Sibal cited the example of NFL (National Football League) of US where according to him has more than one vote given to one state. "In US, there are many states like New York and California who have more than one vote," Sibal tried to convince the court that this practice can be continued in India.
But what Sibal forgot to tell the special bench was that NFL is a professional American football league and not like the BCCI which is picking Team India. In simple words, Indian Premier League (IPL) franchisee teams can well be compared with that of NFL and not the states which are participating in the Ranji Trophy or domestic competitions.
Any how, the court hardly looked convinced by BCA arguments.
It was then the turn of former disgraced BCCI president N Srinivasan's ruled Tamil Nadu Cricket Association (TNCA) to present their case. Senior advocate Arvind Dattar submitted that "the recommendation of one state-one vote will create inequality rather than equality".
"The recommendation will create inequality rather than equality. It will promote inequality among equals," said TNCA. The bench then asked when one country, irrespective of its population, constitutes one vote in International Cricket Council (ICC), then why cannot the formula work for BCCI?
The bench made it clear that because it has already ruled that BCCI is performing "public functions" there is no way that it can escape the reforms being recommended by Justice Lodha panel.
"We make it clear that we are not concerned with any state cricket associations but if they want to associate with BCCI, which is selecting Team India and performing public function, then they have to reform themselves. You (state associations) will have to fall in line and reform yourselves or you will lose your membership," the court gave a clear cut message to all states.
The court didn't stop there. "You (BCCI) are running a prohibitory regime which is spread across the country. If a player has to play cricket he has to be with you. You have complete monopoly. You have monopoly over members and you prevent people from becoming members. Otherwise, how can a state like Bihar has no representation," asked the court, adding: "Suppose a state from North East wants to be a member in BCCI. You are not allowing it to become a member because your writ lies there also. You don't want to give them equal opportunity. You have complete monopoly over Team India because you select them and don't want to give the right to anyone else. We need to balance things."
The apex court also said that several youngsters in states which are not member of BCCI wants to be (MS) Dhonis and (Virat) Kohlis, but don't have equal opportunity.
"Several youngsters in the country want to make their career in cricket and want to be Dhonis and Kohlis due to the glamour and glitz associated with it. They do not get equal opportunity if they are not on the right side of the BCCI," said chief justice Thakur.
The argument will continue on Friday.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Dhoni-Kohli")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}