BCCI office bearers not to heed CoA directives

The BCCI office bearers have told the Supreme Court-appointed Committee of Administrators (CoA) that they will not heed the directives curtailing their decision-making powers that were issued last week. The office bearers also said it would not be possible to postpone the BCCI's special general body meeting (SGM) on April 9, as directed by the CoA.

Late on March 26, the CoA issued a set of directives, reminding the BCCI office bearers that they could not take independent decisions without the committee's permission.

On Monday, three of the board's office bearers - Amitabh Choudhary (joint-secretary), Anirudh Chaudhry (treasurer) and CK Khanna (vice-president) - met members of the CoA in Mumbai. Both parties discussed the court orders issued since January this year to ascertain the powers of the office bearers. Later in the evening, the office bearers sent an email to the CoA stating they were governed by the BCCI's existing constitution and not the CoA.

Despite staunch opposition from the BCCI to adopting the Lodha Committee's recommendations, the CoA stressed it would not confront the states and instead communicate to sort out the hurdles. The office bearers, too, said they were not against the CoA: "Our intention is to work with the CoA in an amicable and constructive manner whilst exercising our duties."

The CoA was told that majority of the BCCI members - state associations - wanted to discuss the fallout from the court orders at the SGM. Consequently, Choudhary, at the direction of Khanna - the acting BCCI president, since he is the most senior vice-president - convened the SGM on April 9 in Mumbai. The CoA then asked the SGM to be deferred.

The office bearers, however, declined to put off the SGM and told the CoA it was free to attend the SGM in person or via video conferencing.

"With regard to the request for change in date of the SGM made in today's meeting as well as in the subsequent email, the same can hardly be effected by us in view of the nature of the requisition by a majority of the General Body and its notice having already been issued to over three dozen members."

The office bearers also said it was "inconceivable" to expect them to share the decisions taken by any of the BCCI committees with the CoA, as it had directed. "However, the undersigned can assure you that the decisions of the General Body will undoubtedly be in line with the best interests of the BCCI and would not be in violation of Court orders."

The office bearers objected to the CoA uploading the amended BCCI constitution, which complied with the Lodha Committee's recommendations, on the board's website. This action, the office bearers said, was misleading only because the BCCI had not adopted the new constitution. "The proposed constitution as put up on the website has been unfortunately put in a way that has misled a substantial part of the cricket fraternity into believing that the same has been adopted and brought into force which is admittedly not the case."

The office bearers also clarified the court had never imposed an age cap of 70 on members of any of the board's committees. That restriction was only mandatory for the office bearers at both the BCCI and state associations.