The Madras High Court reserved orders on a petition filed by Chennai Super Kings challenging the orders of the Justice Lodha Committee suspending it for two years.
The First Bench, comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice TS Sivagnanam, reserved orders on the plea and said the petition filed by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy "is subject to the result of the present petition."
When the petition filed by CSK challenging the orders of the Lodha Committee came up on Monday, BCCI informed the Court that it has not recognized CSK as franchise for IPL.
Senior counsel for BCCI AL Somayaji submitted that CSK Cricket Limited is only a brand name of the franchise owned by India Cements Limited.
He submitted that the franchise agreement was between BCCI and India Cements and India Cements has no right to assign or delegate ownership-- even if it does it should be done with prior permission from BCCI.
He argued that CSK Cricket Limited which got transferred the ownership from India Cements Limited was not at all an aggrieved party and hence the liberty given by the Supreme Court that the aggrieved can approach the appropriate forum for remedy will not entitle CSK to file the petition.
He submitted that BCCI is a society registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act. If at all punishment of suspension is to be challenged, it cannot be a subject matter of writ proceedings, because it is a punishment imposed on its member as disciplinary action as per bye-laws of BCCI,he said.
He further argued that India Cements Limited was fully heard by Justice Lodha Committee as a franchise and "its unbecoming conduct was noticed by the Committee and at behest of the CSK Cricket Limited, the high court should not go into the validity of punishment imposed."
Senior Counsel Nalini Chidambaram, appearing on behalf of the Bihar Cricket Association, submitted that the petition filed by CSK was not at all maintainable as Justice Lodha Committee's records were not made available before this court.