Supreme Court today cracked its whip against a "defiant and obstructionist" BCCI, its President Anurag Thakur and GM (cricket operation) Ratnakar Shetty for "undermining" the Justice R M Lodha committee's directions and ordered the cash-rich body to stop disbursing funds to state units till they abided by its recommendations on reforms in "letter and spirit".
The apex court, which warned the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) from "precipitating" the issue, also directed Thakur to explain by filing "personal affidavit", the allegation "whether he had asked the CEO of the ICC to state that the appointment of Justice Lodha Committee was tantamount to government interference in the working of the BCCI".
Shetty, a long-standing cricket administrator and General Manager (Admin and Game development) at BCCI, was also directed by the top court to come clean by placing on record a copy of the authorisation/resolution passed by the BCCI on the basis of which he has filed the affidavit supporting the response of the BCCI to the status report.
Both Thakur and Shetty were directed by the apex court to file separate affidavits within 10 days before the matter is taken up for further hearing on October 17.
A bench headed by Chief Justice T S Thakur noted the submission of BCCI that the cricket body has received Rs 2500 crore towards compensation on account of termination of Champion League T-20 tournament, out of which Rs 16.73 crore each remained to be given to state bodies after disbursal of amounts towards taxes and other liabilities.
It also took into account the submission of BCCI that out of the 25 associations, only 13 of them have so far received the balance amount of Rs 16.73 crore each and 12 have not received the amount.
The bench said the sequence of events after July 18, which are referred to in the status report, "prima facie give an impression that BCCI has far from lending its fullest cooperation to the Committee, adopted an obstructionist and at times a defiant attitude which the Committee has taken note of and described as an impediment, undermining not only the Committee but even the dignity of this Court, with several statements and actions which according to the Committee are grossly out of order and may even constitute contempt".
It directed that "no further amount in terms of the Resolution passed in AGM on November 9, 2015 or any subsequent resolution by the BCCI or its Working Committee shall be disbursed to any State Association except where the State Association concerned passes a proper resolution to the effect that it is agreeable to undertake and to support the reforms as proposed and accepted by this Court in letter and spirit".
The bench, in its order, said that "upon such a
Resolution being passed, a copy of the same shall be filed before Justice Lodha Committee with an affidavit of the President of the State Association concerned unequivocally undertaking to abide by the reforms as proposed by the Committee and accepted and modified by this Court.
"A similar affidavit with a copy of the Resolution shall be filed before this Court also. It is only after such affidavits are filed, that BCCI may transfer the balance amount of Rs.16.73 crores payable to the State Associations."
It said that with regard to "the 13 State Associations to whom the payment has already been disbursed, we direct that the State Associations concerned shall not appropriate the said amount, except after they have passed a resolution and filed an affidavit as mentioned above before Justice Lodha Committee and before this Court.
"In case the affidavits are not filed, the amount disbursed to the State Associations shall be invested by the Associations in a term deposit subject to further directions of this Court," the bench said.
The bench asked senior advocate Arvind Dattar, appearing for BCCI to produce the original records on the basis of which the affidavit by Shetty on behalf of BCCI was filed.
After the order was pronounced, BCCI's counsel Radha Ranagaswamy told the bench that "BCCI was not running away from the reforms. There are some technical impediments".
At this, the bench said, "We will remove all technical impediments. You take instructions and file an affidavit. We are hearing the matter on October 17. Do not precipitate matters. Not pleasant for us. Better you file an affidavit".
The bench in its order also noted that despite Lodha committee sending several e-mails to BCCI chief Anurag Thakur, as well as the directions issued to him to appear on August 9, "has not evoked even a single response from him".
The apex court also took note of the submission by the Lodha panel that BCCI's AGM took decisions in violation of the directives issued by the panel which acted as "impediment in the implementation of the judgment of this court".
The bench, which also comprised Justices A M Khanwilkar
and D Y Chandrachud, said "all that we need mention is that in the implementation of the recommendations of the Committee, the BCCI appears to be non-cooperative in its attitude.
"It has, despite directions issued by the Committee, released in favour of the State Cricket Associations substantial amounts running into crores of rupees without the permission of Justice Lodha Committee and in defiance of the direction issued by it".
The court recorded the submissions of Amicus Curiae Gopal Subramanium that despite directions from Lodha panel, BCCI released funds in favour of state cricket associations to "possibly induce them to oppose the reforms suggested by Justice Lodha Committee".
To this, the bench said "we do not at this stage propose to express any final view on the true intention behind the disbursement of the amount in favour of the State Associations and whether, and if so, what action is called for against BCCI and its office holders.
"All that we wish to say is that the BCCI could and indeed ought to have avoided the disbursement of such a huge amount while Justice Lodha Committee was still examining the need for formulating a Disbursement Policy," it said.
The bench said if non-adoption of the Memorandum of Association (MOA) proposed by Lodha panel reflected reluctance of state associations, then "there is no reason why the State Associations that are opposed to the reforms suggested by Justice Lodha Committee and accepted by this Court, should either expect or draw any benefit from the release of grants by the BCCI".
