COA asks states to submit compliance report by March 1

The Supreme Court-appointed Committee of Administrators has specified that an office-bearer who has completed nine years in a post either at the BCCI or at a state association will become ineligible to hold any official post thereafter.

This directive was part of an e-mail sent to state associations on Wednesday, in which the COA has also sought compliance reports concerning the implementation of the Lodha Committee recommendations at the state level. The associations have been asked to submit these reports over e-mail by March 1. This is the first set of directives issued by the COA after it was appointed by the court on January 30.

There has been confusion over the specifics of the nine-year tenure cap since the release of the Lodha Committee recommendations in January 2016. The original Lodha Committee recommendation regarding eligibility, which was passed by the Supreme Court on July 18 last year, had made it possible for an individual to serve nine years each at both BCCI and state level. A BCCI office-bearer's cooling-off period could have been a three-year term at their state association, after which they could once again contest an election for a BCCI position. And if they won the BCCI post, the ensuing three-year term would serve as their cooling-off period from holding office at state level. An individual could therefore have spent 18 years in Indian cricket administration between the BCCI and his state association.

On January 2, 2017, the Supreme Court stated in an order that, "A person shall be disqualified from being an Office Bearer if he or she has been an Office Bearer of the BCCI for a cumulative period of 9 years." A day later, the Court, while modifying the order issued a day earlier, ruled that an office bearer would be disqualified in case he had completed a "cumulative period" of nine years at "BCCI or a state association."

The Lodha Committee's interpretation of the Court's modification of January 3 was that if an individual had finished nine years as an office-bearer, whether at BCCI or state level or both combined, that individual was ineligible to continue as an office-bearer at the BCCI or state level effective immediately.

On January 20, the court said that its January 3 modification was likely "to create some ambiguity" and therefore it was issuing a fresh clarification on the tenure for an office bearer. It said an administrator would be disqualified if he "has been an office bearer of the BCCI for nine years or a State Association for the same period."

This fresh ruling was interpreted by the office-bearers as a reprieve and an indication that they could continue for nine years separately at BCCI and their respective states. Subsequently, senior administrators like BCCI joint secretary Amitabh Choudhury and treasurer Anirudh Chaudhry have continued at the board despite having finished nine years as presidents of their respective state associations. On Monday, IPL chairman Rajiv Shukla, who has passed the nine-year cap as Uttar Pradesh Cricket Association president, attended the IPL 2017 auction as head of the league's governing council.

As an attempt to put an end to the confusion, the COA has now pointed out that it would stick to the Lodha Committee's interpretation of the court's order until a new directive is issued by the Supreme Court.

The COA laid out its stand under the subhead: "Disqualification of office bearers/representatives/nominees/patron/advisor/committee member/council members of state/member association" in the e-mail to the sates on Wednesday.

"The committee of administrators has been informed that there is lack of clarity on the exact scope and extent of the disqualification in terms of the order dated January 2, 2017, January 3, 2017 and January 20, 2017, passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court," the COA said. "The committee of administrators is of the view that until there is complete clarity on the exact scope and extent of the disqualification in terms of the aforesaid order the committee of administrators should proceed on a strict undertaking/interpretation of the same.

"As per the advice received by the committee of administrators, this strict understanding/interpretation has the effect on disqualifying all persons who fail to meet the norms recommended by the Lodha Committee and accepted by Supreme Court for being office bearers/representatives/nominees/patron/advisor/committee member/council members of state/member association."

Consequently, the states have been asked to submit list of their existing office bearers along with each individual's elaborate details. Importantly, all administrators would also need to submit a written undertaking that they conform with the eligibility criteria to the COA by the March 1 deadline.

The COA has also asked the state associations that have complied with the courts orders dated October 7 and October 21 last year to submit their resolution in writing by March 1. Last October, the court passed two orders which asked the BCCI to "cease and desist" from supplying funds to the states unless and until they gave a written undertaking that they would comply with the Lodha Committee recommendations as approved by the court.