NEW DELHI: It's a rarity in T20 cricket as also in litigation, but a bitter legal contest between the cricket board's ex-president A C Muthiah and present secretary N Srinivasan ended in a tie in the Supreme Court on Thursday.
A bench comprising Justices J M Panchal and Gyan Sudha Misra gave a split verdict on Muthiah's challenge to an amendment to a BCCI rule, which allowed Srinivasan to hold office as treasurer and later secretary while his company, India Cement, owned the Chennai Super Kings team for the IPL T20 tournament.
The unamended rule had prohibited administrators from having commercial interest in all cricket matches organised by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI). However, the September 2008 amendment permitted them to have business interest in T20 matches.
Justice Panchal ruled in favour of Srinivasan and dismissed Muthiah's plea. He agreed that after the amendment was effected by BCCI, Srinivasan could not be faulted more so when he was only one of the 12 directors on the India Cement board.
But, Justice Misra allowed Muthiah's appeal and said Srinivasan could not be seen wearing two hats -- one being that of a cricket administrator and the other with commercial interest in matches organised by the Board.
With the litigation ending in a tie with the split verdict, the Bench ordered the matter be placed before the Chief Justice for fresh hearing by a new bench.
The Board had rallied behind Srinivasan. It had termed Muthiah as an outsider who was resorting to bodyline bowling to disrupt cricket administration.
Srinivasan had said he was not the alter ego of India Cement, which owns the IPL T20 team Chennai Super Kings, and hence as a cricket administrator could not be accused of breaching the conflict of interest code. He had said that he had not participated in the decision of the India Cement Board to bid for the IPL team.
A bench comprising Justices J M Panchal and Gyan Sudha Misra gave a split verdict on Muthiah's challenge to an amendment to a BCCI rule, which allowed Srinivasan to hold office as treasurer and later secretary while his company, India Cement, owned the Chennai Super Kings team for the IPL T20 tournament.
The unamended rule had prohibited administrators from having commercial interest in all cricket matches organised by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI). However, the September 2008 amendment permitted them to have business interest in T20 matches.
Justice Panchal ruled in favour of Srinivasan and dismissed Muthiah's plea. He agreed that after the amendment was effected by BCCI, Srinivasan could not be faulted more so when he was only one of the 12 directors on the India Cement board.
But, Justice Misra allowed Muthiah's appeal and said Srinivasan could not be seen wearing two hats -- one being that of a cricket administrator and the other with commercial interest in matches organised by the Board.
With the litigation ending in a tie with the split verdict, the Bench ordered the matter be placed before the Chief Justice for fresh hearing by a new bench.
The Board had rallied behind Srinivasan. It had termed Muthiah as an outsider who was resorting to bodyline bowling to disrupt cricket administration.
Srinivasan had said he was not the alter ego of India Cement, which owns the IPL T20 team Chennai Super Kings, and hence as a cricket administrator could not be accused of breaching the conflict of interest code. He had said that he had not participated in the decision of the India Cement Board to bid for the IPL team.
0 comments:
Post a Comment