The bench mentioned that "betting and spot-fixing" issues were affecting the health of the game so much that it was important to hire "renowned surgeons like Justice Lodha Committee" to cure the deep-rooted disease.
The Supreme Court on Friday took a dig at Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) secretary Anurag Thakur's statement that the Board was planning to open a cricket academy in the North East to help the development of cricket in that region.
"It took you (BCCI) more than six decades to reach this decision?" said the Special Bench of Chief Justice of India TS Thakur and FMI Kalifulla.
The bench mentioned that "betting and spot-fixing" issues were affecting the health of the game so much that it was important to hire "renowned surgeons like Justice Lodha Committee" to cure the deep-rooted disease.
"The disease (in BCCI) was so deep-rooted that it could not have been healed with medicines. It needed a surgery. Hence, a competent committee was formed to do it," the bench said.
The SC once again told the BCCI that enforcement of age and tenure caps were mandatory. The Court went on to question the election of late BCCI president Jagmohan Dalmiya despite him being "incapacitated" at the time of taking charge.
"It's written in Justice Lodha report that he (Dalmiya) was not able to communicate properly. Why did those who elected him to the top post not see? BCCI president has been given five years more than Supreme Court judges," the bench said.
"Look at legendary spinner Bishan Singh Bedi who has already submitted that he doesn't want to continue in any capacity beyond 70 years of age. Everyone knows that a person of his stature could well contribute immensely to the game," the bench added.
Meanwhile, the Odisha Cricket Association (OCA) opposed the Lodha Committee's one-state-one-vote proposal on the ground that "it would degrade the level of competition."
"Territorial classification is not correct classification. It would result in downspin of the game if associations from North East become full members and made to play against stronger teams," OCA said.
The bench countered by saying, "Do you want to say that India refused to play against Sri Lanka or Bangladesh or now Afghanistan when they were trying to compete at the highest level? What is your problem? You don't wan to play against weaker teams who will get beaten initially?"
The Court also took a dig at BCCI's system of fund allocation while rejecting OCA's arguments. "The larger the number of members, lesser is the allocation. You wouldn't want to make smaller states full members because the larger the number of full members, lesser is the share," the bench said.
The hearing will continue on Monday.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Supreme Court")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}