Supreme Court Amicus Curiae Gopal Subramaniam and Anil Divanas on Friday submitted the names of nine candidates to act as administrators for the Board of Control for Cricket in India. However, the bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra questioned why the list, handed in in a sealed envelope, recommended septuagenarians, The Indian Express reported.
The amicus curiae had been asked to recommend six names – including three cricketers – to serve as administrators who will oversee the BCCI’s implementation of recommendations made by the Justice Lodha panel. One of the committee’s recommendations was to bring in administrators not over 70 years old.
While the Supreme Court said that a nine-member team of administrators would be too large, according to CNN-News18, Kapil Sibal, counsel for the cricketing body, opposed the proposed names. The court is expected the declare the administrators on January 24, when the next hearing in the matter will be held.
Moreover, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi urged the apex court to reconsider its decision to downgrade the railways, universities and services to associate members of the BCCI, as this would strip them of their voting rights, the News18 report said. “Although the BCCI is a private body, it partially affects the government. I urge the court to reconsider its decision,” he said.
The Centre had filed a plea on behalf of the three associations, challenging a clause that stops the appointment of government servants and ministers as BCCI members. The attorney general argued that bringing in the proposed reforms required a larger debate and must be referred to a bigger bench, according to Hindustan Times.
On January 2, the Supreme Court had sacked Anurag Thakur from the post of BCCI president and Ajay Shirke from the secretary’s position. Thakur faced perjury charges after Subramaniam had accused him of lying under oath when he denied seeking a letter from the International Cricket Council.
The Lodha committee was formed after the spot-fixing and betting scandal emerged during the 2013 leg of the Indian Premier League. On October 6, the apex court had directed the BCCI to either implement the Lodha recommendations or face consequences. However, on October 15, the BCCI had decided to oppose some of the “impractical” reforms suggested by the committee. The two sides have been at odds over a few recommendations, including the one vote per state and one person per post rule, the age cap for office-bearers and the cooling-off period between tournaments.