States 'alarmed' at COA 'overstepping' its role

Many state associations have written to the Supreme Court-appointed Committee of Administrators stating they are "alarmed" by the COA "overstepping" its jurisdiction and issuing directives that even the court had not included in its various orders.

In separate e-mails sent to the COA on Wednesday, the state associations have said that they are protected by rights under the Indian constitution and will only accept directives by the court, which is scheduled to reassemble on March 27.

This was the response to a COA directive, asking the state associations for a compliance report with respect to their implementation of the Lodha Committee's recommendations.

The deadline of March 1 has come and gone and while the exact number of state associations opposing the COA is unclear, it is learnt the decision to stand against them was taken by close to 20 BCCI members.

It was the state associations, some of them Full Members of the board, which had stalled the implementation of the Lodha reforms, both at BCCI and state levels, raising objection to the recommendations during various court hearings and board meetings. Last week, past and present officials from these disgruntled state associations met in Delhi to formulate a response to the COA directive.

It is understood the tone and content of the e-mails sent by the state associations was similar. ESPNcricinfo has accessed a copy which said: "At the very outset, we wish to draw to your attention to the fact that the mandate of the committee is primarily to ensure compliance of the Judgment and Order dated 18.7.2016 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, wherein the Supreme Court itself, has observed and given its finding that the Lodha committee recommendations as accepted by the Hon'ble Court, do not affect the composition of the State Cricket Associations and has thus further clarified that the rights of members of the State Associations under Article 19 (1) (c) of the Constitution of India continues to remain protected."

The state associations also disagreed with the COA's understanding on the tenure of the office bearers. Originally, the Lodha Commmittee had recommended that a person can serve up to a combined nine years at both BCCI and state level. The Supreme Court, however, ruled that office bearers can have nine years each at central and state level, that is a total of 18 years in cricket administration.

However, last week, the COA in an email said due to "the lack of clarity on the exact scope and extent of the disqualification" and as per advice it had received, it reiterated that an office bearer's tenure could not extend beyond a total of nine years at both BCCI and state levels. This has sparked severe opposition from the state associations.

"It is submitted respectfully that we have to strongly disagree with your view that the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court are lacking in clarity on the issue of disqualifications in terms of orders dated 2nd, 3rd and 20th January, 2017," the state association email said. "In fact we feel the orders are clear on the subject. We are alarmed at the attempt to go beyond the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court by improving on the disqualifications and also upon the categories of persons who are liable to be disqualified."

It was also pointed out that the court order was restricted to only the office bearers. "There is neither any recommendation nor any order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court pertaining to disqualifications being applied to representatives/ nominees/ patrons/ advisors/ committee members/ council members of state/ member associations. Equally, there is no order of the Hon'ble Court in effect that makes persons who have been office bearers of BCCI for a total period of 9 years to be disqualified as office bearers in state cricket associations leave alone to be a representative/ nominee/ patron/ advisor/ committee member or council member.

In fact the Hon'ble Court had made it abundantly clear on 20.01.2017 that period of 9 years as office bearer in BCCI would count only towards the BCCI and the period of 9 years in State Associations would count only towards the State Associations. We respectfully feel that you have overstepped your defined role and gone beyond the orders of the Hon'ble Court and the same is without jurisdiction and not in furtherance of any orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court."

According to these state associations, the COA cannot govern or direct them to do anything since they are "autonomous independent organisations registered under various statutes." They have told the COA that the court has "agreed" to listen to their objections - most likely at the next hearing on March 27 - and until then they have made it clear that they would not obey any COA directives.

"In these circumstances we feel that any further attempts to impose your directives ought to be deferred till the matters are decided."