Apart from the amount, the Delhi and District Cricket Association (DDCA) would also be entitled to media rights shares for the test from BCCI, which will have to quantify the same, Justice Mudgal has said in a supplementary report submitted in the high court.
The report, which was placed before a bench of justices S Muralidhar and Vibhu Bakhru, has stated that the estimation of Rs 2.8 crore for the test in December 2015 was arrived at on the basis of the Rs 2.5 crore received by DDCA from BCCI for hosting the 2013 India-Australia test at the same stadium.
The report filed through advocate Nitin Mishra was taken on record by the court which listed the matter on February 22, when another report would be filed with regard to status of permissions obtained by DDCA to hold matches at the stadium.
The high court on November 18, 2015, while allowing DDCA to hold the India-South Africa test, had directed it to obtain all clearances from local authorities by March 31 this year.
In his supplementary report, Justice Mudgal has also given recommendations on how the 10,000 complimentary passes ought to be distributed as well as how the association can fetch more revenue by giving corporate boxes, numbering around 40, for a long term of 10 years.
The report also contains a blueprint which lays down
various responsibilities like setting up a supervisory committee for obtaining permissions and making sub-committees to take care of tendering, ticketing and security functions, as well as maintaining provisional accounts.
The blueprint also specifies the timelines within which the various functions are to be performed by the DDCA members.
"If the above template (blueprint) is followed by DDCA, there is no reason why future matches cannot be conducted capably and profitably. Of course this would depend on choosing of conscientious personnel for DDCA," Justice Mudgal had said in his supplementary report.
He had also said that an internal audit of DDCA had shown shortcomings and financial irregularities.
The report had stated that deficiencies were found in tendering system, record keeping, delay in payment of bills, allotment of corporate boxes and naming of pavilions and stands, finance, defunct sub-committees, ticketing, broadcasting, media and permissions.
The main issue dates back to 2011 when DDCA filed a plea against a property tax assessment made by the MCD with regard to the stadium. The matter is still pending in the high court.
As per SDMC there was no provision under the law to issue a provisional occupancy certificate.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
