Home »  Sport

Why is Sanjay Patel dancing to N Srinivasan's tunes?

Saturday, 26 April 2014 - 8:50am IST | Place: New Delhi | Agency: dna

BCCI secretary yet to convene Special General Meeting to decide future of disgraced president-in-abeyance in board's disciplinary committee

It has been six days since the working committee of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) asked secretary Sanjay Patel to convene a Special General Meeting (SGM) to decide the future of disgraced president-in-abeyance N Srinivasan in the board's disciplinary committee. Alas, Patel has made little headway so far.

According to the BCCI constitution, an SGM shall be convened with a 21-day notice. At least two state association presidents told this paper that they hadn't received any communique from the secretary.

It is learnt that the anti-Srinivasan camp, headed by former BCCI chief Shashank Manohar, has demanded that interim president Shivlal Yadav use his powers to call the one. According to the BCCI constitution, an SGM is called by the secretary, on instructions from the president. However, if the secretary fails to convene the meeting at the president's direction, or on a resolution of a working committee, the president himself can convene the meeting. The ball is now in Yadav's court. However, it remains to be seen if Yadav rises to the occasion. After all, he is very much part of the Srini camp.

"Who is trying to delay this SGM and for what reason? Last Sunday, the house had arrived at a consensus to convene an SGM in the second week of May," a North Zone official said.

Wasn't the working committee aware of the fact that its decision to propose to the Supreme Court the names of Ravi Shastri, JN Patel and RK Raghavan would fall flat? After all, each of the individuals had something or the other to do with the BCCI or its officials? "Most of the working committee members were determined to send clear signals to the Manohar camp that he couldn't have his way. What did he do when he was president from 2008 to 2011? It is he who failed to to address the conflict of interest issue surrounding Srinivasan. Why is he crying now?" a senior BCCI official said on condition of anonymity. It's a different matter, though, that the BCCI is now regretting its decision. After all, Justice Mudgal is back in the picture.

Back to the moot point, and it is imperative that Patel or Yadav convene an SGM at the earliest.

Verma hopes to quash Srini's ICC dreams
Cricket Association of Bihar (CAB) secretary-general Aditya Verma has decided to raise the issue of Srinivasan representing India at the International Cricket Council (ICC) before the apex court on Tuesday.

"The honorable court has removed him as BCCI president. How can he continue to represent the BCCI at the ICC until and unless his name is cleared by the Justice Mukul Mudgal Committee?" Verma reasoned. "We are going to press for barring Srinivasan from representing BCCI at the ICC. We have already made a prayer in front of the court," said senior counsel Nalini Chidambaram, who is representing CAB. "Srinivasan's insistence that he was free to be part of the ICC, was akin to 'a man who is not fit to be a high court judge but he wants to be a Supreme Court judge'," added Chidambaram.

It must be mentioned here that Srinivasan is set to take over as ICC chairman — a post he created in connivance with the cricket boards of England and Australia — in July. It may be recalled that the ICC recently underwent a complete overhaul. India, England and Australia are now called 'The Big Three'.

Verma also stated that he made five prayers in the Bombay high court last year after the spot-fixing scandal came to light. "My first plea was to set aside the BCCI-appointed two-judge panel to probe the corruption allegations. And the honorable court also ruled in our favour. However, our demand to constitute an independent panel was not accepted as the court wanted the BCCI to appoint another panel," said Verma.

Verma's other pleas also included that "Srinivasan should not represent India at the ICC meetings. He should not be the BCCI president. His Chennai Super Kings franchise should be terminated and he should also not be part of the Tamil Nadu Cricket Association, of which he is life-long president".

Jump to comments

Recommended Content