Supreme Court dismisses BCCI plea to review conflict-of-interest clause

The Supreme Court’s rejection of the BCCI plea is a huge blow for N Srinivasan

The Supreme Court of India has refused to consider the BCCI's appeal for a review of a landmark verdict that had obliterated the disputable amendment to the conflict-of-interest clause. ESPNCricinfo reported that the apex legal body in India has disregarded the petition stating that it did not warrant an evaluation.

It is a significant riposte to the BCCI which appealed against the court’s ruling in the contentious issue that had created flutters among the board members. The Supreme Court had earlier reprimanded the exiled ex-BCCI President, N Srinivasan, for interfering in board affairs.

A legal expert said: "Ordinarily, these reviews are heard in the chambers. If there is an error apparent in the face of the judgment, then they will review it. It's an extraordinary power and is not meant to be used lightly. If they have made a glaring error, then they will review it and correct it, otherwise they won't exercise powers."

The Supreme Court, in a watershed judgment related to the 2013 IPL corruption case, had annulled the modification to the BCCI constitution's clause 6.2.4 that allowed board officials to participate in the IPL and the Champions League T20 on a commercial basis.

The amendment to the clause was effected in 2008 in the aftermath of the circumstances which saw the Chennai IPL franchise being sold to India Cements, a company owned by then BCCI secretary Srinivasan.

The Supreme Court’s decision had multiple ramifications which directly amended the constitution of BCCI which was a private body and did not come under the purview of the Right To Information (RTI) Act. Justice TS Thakur and FMI Kalifullah deemed the alteration “void and impermissible in law" as it promoted conflict of interest within the governing body for cricket in India.

In an apparent retaliation to the Supreme Court's order, the BCCI’s top brass had asked representatives of state associations and members of the board to sign a declaration dispelling the notion that they encouraged conflict of interest. However, it did not meet with a unanimous response from all state associations with a few of them reluctant to challenge the Supreme Court ruling.

The issue was supposed to be discussed in the working committee meeting on August 28. But, the meeting was adjourned when a few of the participating members objected to the presence of Srinivasan. BCCI’s next move is geared towards selecting the President on October 4.