State associations of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), who have been resisting the implementation of Lodha committee reforms, could face plenty of heat on Monday in the Supreme Court.
This is because the board's legal firm, Amarchand and Mangaldas, submitted leading audit firm Deloitte's report -which highlights massive corruption in some state units-to the apex court in a sealed envelope on Thursday. The board had hired Deloitte under its 'project transformation' in November 2015 when current ICC chairman Shashank Manohar was president.
"There's a possibility of the report coming up for discussion in the SC on Monday. This isn't a small question of controlling the BCCI. This is a question of state association officials facing possible jail terms because a criminal investigation is likely to be ordered," said a source. The Committee of Administrators (COA) in charge of running BCCI's affairs at present too is likely to have a copy of the report and may submit a 'status report' to the court on the day.
The committee recently submitted an initial status report to the court. The COA had issued a directive asking state associations for a compliance report by March 1, but around 20 BCCI members have written back stating that as per the SC order of July 18 last year, the Lodha committee reforms do not affect the composition of state associations.
State units have also pointed out that the COA's understanding of the tenure of office bearers -in tune with the Lodha Committee's recommendation that a person can serve up a combined nine years at both BCCI and state level -is misplaced. According to them, the SC has, in its Jan 30 order, ruled that office bearers can have nine years each at central and state level, making for a total of 18 years in cricket administration.
Will the SC hearing on Monday afternoon offer clarity on these issues? "The court may not think that it's necessary to give a clarification (about the tenure clause). SC's last order has been deliberately misinterpreted. In fact, the court may have to see whether some people are disqualified on other grounds as well. The court may look into whether there's been an interference with the functioning of administrators," said a source.
Courtesy: The Times of India