HC notice for BCCI rule amendment

Chennai: Bracing itself to hear former president AC Muthiah’s allegations that the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) secretary N Srinivasan derived direct commercial benefits from the BCCI, the Madras High Court has ordered notices to the Board as well as Srinivasan. Justice P R Shivakumar ordered the notices on Tuesday and posted the matter to Dec 20 for further proceedings. In the present civil suit, filed by Muthiah through his counsel Nalini Chidambaram, submitted that Rule 6.2.4 of the BCCI regulations clearly specified that no cricketer, umpire or administrator should have any direct or indirect commercial transactions with the BCCI. Despite this prohibition clause, Srinivasan allowed the India Cements, of which he is the managing director, to bid for one of the eight teams in the Indian Premier League (IPL). Muthiah said Srinivasan was treasurer of the Board when his company won ownership of the Chennai Super Kings. After Muthiah claimed that he filed a civil suit questioning this indiscretion and seeking judicial order restraining Srinivasan from contesting in the BCCI elections, the Board met in September last year and amended the prohibition clause in favour of Srinivasan. In the present suit, Muthiah said that though the prohibition clause was originally applicable to test matches, one-day internationals, IPL, domestic and international cricket events, the amended clause excluded IPL or T20 format alone from its purview. The exclusion was done with a malafide intention to benefit an individual and it should be struck down as illegal, he said. The working committee of the BCCI approved the amendment, he said, adding that Srinivasan himself was a member of the committee.

"Loved reading this piece by G. ARAVINTHAN?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"

Join our Telegram group

Join our Whatsapp group