Bench:
N.Santosh Hegde, S.N. Variava, B.P.Singh, H.K.Sema, S.B. Sinha
Issue:
Is BCCI a state under the meaning of Article 12 of the constitution?
Facts:
- The appellanthad entered into a broadcasting agreement with the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI)
- The agreement was opposed on the basis of BCCI having no control on the broadcasting rights.
- On arbitrary termination of the broadcasting agreement the appellant filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution.
Appellant's contentions:
It was contended that the BCCI has the defacto control of the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports which is recognized by the government so BCCI functions without the interference of the government.
Respondent's contentions:
The respondent contended that the government has no control as the board is an autonomous body and denied recognition by the government.
Judgement:
The Supreme Court held that "the writ petition under Article 32 is maintainable only against a state defined under Article 12 of the Constitution and hence maintainable though BCCI is not a State within the meaning of Article 12."
-Para 22 (Zee Telefilms Ltd. &Anr vs Union of India &Ors)
