PCB challenges HDCA's petition

Hyderabad, Oct 6: The PCB's ad-hoc committee here on Wednesday before Sindh High Court, Hyderabad Circuit Bench has challenged the maintainability of constitutional petition, filed by Hyderabad Division Cricket Association (HDCA) on ground that its acting president, Yar Mohammad Solangi has no authority or power to represent HDCA.

PCB ad-hoc committee is now being represented by Mr Jhemat Mal Jethnand advocate, since Mr Jethnand was in Karachi on Wednesday, his junior, lawyer Sundar Jethnand appeared on behalf of respondents and submitted three counter affidavits on behalf of respondents. He sought a short adjournment for Sept 12 keeping in mind schedule of trophy matches.

However, counsel of HDCA, Mr Allah Bachayo Soomro, notwithstanding the fact that matches of Quaid-i-Azam Trophy Grade-I would be starting from Sept 16 wanted the matter to be fixed on Sept 19. But the court has adjourned the case to Sept 13 when counsels of both sides would argue their case.

A PCB's sub-committee member for Hyderabad, Mr Javed Nisar Channa has filed three counter-affidavits on behalf of PCB's ad-hoc body. One of the counter-affidavits is filed in response to main petition of HDCA while second was filed in response to a contempt of court application of HDCA against six officials including two sub-committee members, Javed Nisar Channa and S.A. Aziz, SDM City Mohammad Sohail Rajput, match referee, Naeem Ahmed and two umpires Saleem Badar and Islam. The third affidavit pertains to an application of HDCA which was filed under order 39 rule 1 and 2 CPC for grant of interim injunctions.

In his first counter-affidavit, Mr Channa while challenging the very validity of petition claimed that Yar Mohammad Solangi, acting president of suspended HDCA had no authority or power to represent petitioner association adding that sub-committee had taken over control of affairs of cricket and frozen its accounts following its appointment by PCB's ad-hoc committee member, Javed Zaman vide letter dated August 5, 1999.

He stated that persons having control over petitioner association including Yar Mohammad Solangi had obtained membership of PCB without having 7-active cricket clubs and two district associations, having 7-active cricket clubs each affiliated to it without furnishing the required undertaking. The affidavit read "petitioner had failed to pay the registration fee, subscription, failed to hold regular meetings and elections since 1990. Petitioner was not keeping proper accounts. Affairs of petitioner were not being carried out in accordance with its constitution. Conduct of persons working in the name of petitioner was derogatory to aims and objects of PCB.

Chairman PCB's ad-hoc committee, Mujeebur Rehman Khan had, therefore, no option but to suspend petitioner".

Channa rejected HDCA's claim that it had worked for the welfare of society or promoted, arranged or regulated affairs of cricket. He denied that petitioner had been successful or made any achievement, had organised any of test or one-day match with India, Australia, New Zealand and Sri Lanka. Saying that petitioner was not an elected body or had held any election, the affidavit claimed that "inquiries revealed that Yar Muhammad Solangi and his colleagues have illegally been claiming to be the office-bearers of petitioner without any election and said persons have misappropriated millions of rupees granted in the name of petitioner by various authorities".

He defended action of chairman PCB ad-hoc committee, Mujeebur Rehman and member Javed Zaman adding that question of appreciating petitioner simply did not arise as its acting president and his colleagues had not done any service to cricket.

Responding to contempt of court charges/application, the counsel on behalf of Mr Javed Nisar Channa and other contemners pleaded that "contemners shown in the application are not party in proceedings. They had no knowledge of petition and orders passed by this honourable court. Sub-committee took over control of petitioner association on August 6, 1999 and selected team for its participation in national junior Under-19 Grade-I cricket championship. This team was present in the ground when first match was postponed."

He claimed that on Sept 7, the PCB sub-committee had made all arrangements of scheduled match to be played between Hyderabad U- 19 and Mirpurkhas U-19 and both the teams were on the ground. He added that someone claiming to be the manager of petitioner along with 6 or 7 boys required sub-committee not to allow its U-19 team adding that said manager had no team with him and proceedings of match had already begun. He denied that any of sub-committee member misbehaved with alleged manager or police was called to drive him and his boys out of the ground. He claimed that persons, shown in application have not violated any order of this honourable court.

In third counter-affidavit, in response to HDCA's application under order 39 - 1 and 2 CPC, Javed Channa claimed that on account of interim injunctions order obtained by petition on Aug 25 and Sept 15, cricket players of Hyderabad region and affairs of cricket are adversely affected.

He informed the court that matches of Quaid-i-Azam Trophy Grade-I are starting from Sept 16 and that if injunction order, passed on Sept 15 is not vacated no team from Hyderabad will be able to participate in said matches. He said persons filing the petition will not suffer any loss if injunction application is dismissed. He said balance of convenience is in favour of respondents.

On Sept 15, 1999 Sindh High Court's Division Bench had restrained the teams of PCB sub-committee and that of HDCA's selected team from participating in national one-day cricket championship.

However, they were allowed to select their own teams.