Court reserves order on Srini’s future in BCCI

R Sedhuraman

Tribune news service

New Delhi, December 17

The Supreme Court today reserved its verdict that would deal with betting and fixing, particularly in the Indian Premier League (IPL), and the possible conflicts of interest arising from the BCCI officials holding stakes in the IPL.
The judgment would also clarify if N Srinivasan can seek re-election to the top post despite owning the IPL team, Chennai Super Kings (CSK). The verdict is expected by January 31, till when the SC has deferred the BCCI election.
A Bench comprising Justices TS Thakur and FMI Kalifulla resumed today's hearing with BCCI's senior counsel Aryaman Sundaram handing over a list of former players holding stakes in the IPL, besides their roles in the BCCI or state cricket associations. The list included Sunil Gavaskar, Sourav Ganguly, Anil Kumble, Ravi Shastri, Lal Chand Rajput, Venkatesh Prasad, K Srikanth and Brijesh Patel.
The Bench had sought the list yesterday to assess the BCCI's plea that letting cricket officials have commercial interest was a pre-requisite for IPL's survival and the promotion of cricket. After perusing the list, the Bench said these players were only helping the BCCI and the IPL with their expertise in the game, not by investing money as in the case of Srinivasan who, through his company, purchased CSK.
The BCCI, however, said some of the players had been on its selection committee that chose Team India and as such were in a position to favour players from the IPL teams they were associated with. Similarly, the India captain was also part of the selection committee. All this could be construed as potential conflicts of interest, but the cricket administrators had no option but to have faith in the captain and former players that they would promote talent in the interest of the game.
Sundaram said it was necessary to maintain a balance in order to ensure that it was a win-win situation for the game, former players and the IPL teams without creating any conflict of interest. In view of this, the IPL format itself was devised in such a way to eliminate conflicts of interest.
Arguing for Srinivasan, senior advocate Kapil Sibal contended that betting and fixing had nothing to do with Srinivasan or other BCCI officials holding stakes in IPL. This was clear from the fact that betting had surfaced far back in 2000, when IPL was not there and BCCI's conflict of interest rule (No. 6.2.4) had not been amended to allow BCCI officials and players to have stakes in IPL.
Appearing for Cricket Association of Bihar (CAB), senior advocate Nalini Chidambaram however pleaded that it had been established that Srinivasan playing multiple roles in the BCCI and the IPL did create conflict of interest. India Cements, the company headed by Srinivasan as Managing Director, had bought CSK in December 2007 before BCCI Rule 6.2.4 was amended in September 2008 and as such he had already incurred disqualification as BCCI treasurer, the post he was holding then. The amendment did not have any retrospective effect, it was pointed out.
She also pleaded that Srinivasan was part of the IPL Governing Council that awarded a compensation of about Rs 13 crore to CSK for cancellation of a match. Sibal admitted that it was an error of judgment.