India news September 27, 2013

Srinivasan can contest election, with riders

ESPNcricinfo staff

The Indian Supreme Court has allowed N Srinivasan to contest the BCCI elections on Sunday but has said that if he wins he cannot take charge as president as long as it is hearing the case before it related to him and the board. The ruling came on a petition filed by the Cricket Association of Bihar (CAB) seeking to restrain Srinivasan from running for re-election pending the verdict on a petition filed by the CAB in July.

Srinivasan reacted by asserting that he would stand for re-election as the court had not stopped him from either attending the AGM or contesting the election.

The court is expected to hear the matter again on Monday, a day after the board meeting.

During the hearing, a bench comprising Justices A K Patnaik and J S Kehar remarked: "Why he is in charge (as the BCCI president) if his son-in-law is chargesheeted? Why are you (Srinivasan) so keen to be elected?"

Srinivasan had in June handed over charge of the daily running of the board to Jagmohan Dalmiya but was looking at Sunday's election as a way of legitimising his presidency. It is not immediately clear whether he will contest the election or whether this will give momentum to those in the BCCI opposing him.

"Now it's up to the Board members to decide whether they can allow Srinivasan to contest the election as he has no power to discharge the president's functions," Aditya Verma, the CAB's secretary, told the Telegraph. "I think the order is kind of a victory for us. The honourable court has definitely found that Srinivasan is at fault in certain aspects. Otherwise, why should the court restrain him from taking charge?"

The earlier petition filed by the CAB had challenged the Bombay High Court's order on the BCCI's inquiry committee that investigated corruption in the IPL, on the grounds that it had failed to appoint a fresh panel despite finding the original one to be constituted illegally. The Supreme Court was due to hear final arguments in the case on September 12, but ran out of time on that day.

The Bombay High Court order, too, came on a petition filed by the CAB questioning the constitution of the two-man inquiry committee set up by the BCCI to probe corruption allegations against the owners of Rajasthan Royals and Chennai Super Kings. Verma had accused Srinivasan of utilising his position as the BCCI president to influence the setting up of the probe panel, which was formed to investigate his company India Cements - the owner of Super Kings - and his son-in-law and Super Kings official Gurunath Meiyappan, who was arrested and subsequently charged with illegal betting. The High Court concluded that there was "a degree of probability" of Srinivasan playing a role in setting up the inquiry panel.

Following the charges against Gurunath, Srinivasan had stepped aside from the day-to-day administration of the BCCI in early June, temporarily handing over the reins to Jagmohan Dalmiya pending Gurunath's investigation. Since then, he has been re-elected as the Tamil Nadu Cricket Association's chief and made it clear that he wishes to return to the top post in the BCCI for another term. The election is set to be held at the board's annual general meeting in Chennai on Sunday and, until now, Srinivasan had faced no public opposition from within the BCCI making it very likely that he would have resumed his role as BCCI president but for the court order.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • Cameron on September 28, 2013, 5:29 GMT

    How bad can the reputation of the BCCI be? This is absurd, he should have been sacked, booted from his position, does he not see the harm he is doing. Just when you think things can't get worse they do. This is unbelievable, I just don't understand how they can function with all these characters.

  • Rohan on September 27, 2013, 22:10 GMT

    @ Rahulbose - that's exactly the sentiment that I have. It's just meaningless cricket happening between teams that you don't even recognize or have any interest in following.

  • Dummy4 on September 27, 2013, 19:18 GMT

    The same old story, let him own more teams in the IPL.....

  • Harry on September 27, 2013, 17:18 GMT

    Here is a solution - BCCI extend his term for another 6 months or postpone the elections until the judicial matters are settled. Srinivasan cannot be held responsible for Gurunath's actions. However the issue is BCCI is a stakeholder of IPL and Srinivasan has a team in IPL that he has a stake in.

    The ideal solution is to disband BCCI and reorganize it with a clean slate with former cricketers like Gavaskar, Shastri, Dravid and Kumble as administrators. Get a finance person to run finances. No businessmen or politicians. They can have teams in IPL but not set foot in cricket's administration.

  • srinivasan on September 27, 2013, 16:40 GMT

    @StraightHit , He can`t wait for the verdict..It will take time..there is only one more year is the available for him to head BCCI...

  • rahul on September 27, 2013, 16:04 GMT

    For a cricket fan these are sad days. Out of habit I check Cricinfo everyday with my morning coffee. And what I find is latest news on some meaningless T20 match played between unknown teams. Accompanied with the latest scandal related to people running the game. It makes my coffee taste more bitter, yet I don't seem to be able to kick the habit.

  • san on September 27, 2013, 16:00 GMT

    Can someone please explain how it is not 'conflict of interest' to own a private IPL club and be the president of BCCI?

  • Steve on September 27, 2013, 15:42 GMT

    @Pavinasen, @Randy_Boy, both of your points view are right. I agree he can't be held responsible if someone in the family commits a crime. However, as the head of the organization, he is accountable and must step aside until legal matters are settled. I am sure he will find more acceptance and support if he were to wait for his time rather than being bull headed.

  • Willem on September 27, 2013, 15:32 GMT

    Has anybody checked with CSA to find out if they may have any objections?

  • Randhirsingh on September 27, 2013, 14:49 GMT

    @Pavinasen - I do not think this is the right example that you have given. This is a professional body (CSK) we are talking about and Srivinasan is the head of that body. His SIL has been charged with a crime related to CSK so ethically and legally Srinivasan ought not to be in charge. This is leaving our the conflict of interest part wherin Srinivas cannot even be the BCCI boss as a IPL team owner. There itself he loses all moral right.

  • No featured comments at the moment.