4 major changes in the draft BCCI Constitution approved by Supreme Court
Reformation process of administration and governance structure of the BCCI finally seems to have reached a practical conclusion. The Supreme Court in a landmark judgment has approved and given effect to the draft BCCI Constitution prepared by the Committee of Administrators (CoA). The CoA was formed as a result of non-compliance of the recommendations by the BCCI and its state associations after the apex court accepted the Lodha Committee recommendations.
The CoA was entrusted with the task of preparing a draft Constitution keeping in line with the Lodha Committee recommendations and also previous judgments/orders of the top Court accepting those recommendations.
A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India Dipak Mishra passed the judgment diluting some of the key recommendations of the committee in order to ensure maximum efficiency in the administration of Cricket by the BCCI.
The draft Constitution will have to be presented to The Registrar of Societies under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 which shall register it and submit a report to the Court within four weeks.
Here are 4 key changes in the draft Constitution which were approved by the Supreme Court.
#1 One-State One Vote
The Lodha Committee had dealt with the issue of membership in its report and recommended that membership of BCCI would consist of 'full members' and 'associate members'. The Committee based its recommendation to grant full membership upon the principle of territoriality.
This essentially means that entities such as Railways Sports Promotion Board and Services Sports Promotion Board which do not represent any territory would not have full membership. This would also lead to states like Gujarat and Maharashtra who each have three cricket associations with only one full membership which shall rotate among them on an annual basis.
The three-judge bench was not in consonance with the principle of territoriality devised to deal with the issue of membership. The Court took into account the history of these cricket associations and their contribution in uplifting the standard of the sport in the country to decide on the membership status.
To utilize territoriality as a basis of exclusion is problematic because it ignores history and the contributions made by such associations to the development of cricket and its popularity,” observed Justice Chandrachud.
As a result, the Court scrapped the one state one vote recommendation and restored full membership status to all three associations each in Gujarat and Maharashtra. It also provided full membership status to Railways Sports Promotion Board, Services Sports Promotion Board and Association of Indian Universities based on their Cricketing history.
This diluted one of the key recommendation which was aimed at curbing the politicization of Cricket administration in India through these Cricket associations.