Two entities working under PCB's name (13 June 1997)

13 June 1997

Two entities working under PCB's name

By Dawn Sports Reporter

KARACHI, June 12: There is a confusing situation in the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) as far as its legitimate status is concerned, Justice (Retd) Fakhruddin G Ebrahim observes in his legal opinion which was sought by the administration.

The former Governor of Sindh states in his three-page report that two separate entities were functioning side-by-side under the name of the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) with the same objects and constitution. "One is a corporate entity registered as a company under the Companies Act, 1913, which owns a number of important properties relating to the promotion of cricket in Pakistan; and the other is a statutory body established under the SRO 55(KE)/95 dated 22.2.1995 issued under the Sports (Department & Control) Ordinance, 1962 (the `1962 Ordinance'). Justice (Retd) Ebrahim emphasises that elimination of this confusion was necessary in order to avoid any legal and other complications that may arise in the future. "It would be much preferable to have a single body for the regulation of cricket in Pakistan instead of allowing two separate entities to continue for the same purpose," he says in his report, which is already with the cricket administrators. Justice (Retd) Ebrahim recommends that it would be preferable to retain PCB, the company, instead of PCB, the statutory body. While giving five reasons for retaining PCB, the company, Justice (Retd) Ebraheem, proposes that the Federal Government be persuaded to dissolve PCB, the statutory body, by withdrawing the two notifications dated 22.2.1995 and 18.9.1979 issued under the 1962 Ordinance.

The following are Justice (Retd) Ebrahim's reasons: 1-All important properties relating to the regulation and promotion of cricket in Pakistan, including the ownership of stadia, vests in PCB, the company (membership of ICC vests in PCB, the company);

2-Winding up of PCB, the company, and thereafter transfer of its assets to PCB, the statutory body, would be time-consuming, complicated and costly as, inter alia, the provisions of the Companies Ordinance, 1984 in addition to any applicable provisions of the Memorandum and Articles of Associations of the company would have to be complicated with. It is also obvious that such an act would be opposed by the members of the company thereby giving rise to yet another public controversy, and possibly even a legal action such as the Writ Petition filed in 1970;

3-It would be much easier to dissolve PCB, the statutory body, by simply withdrawing the notification which brought it into existence (for good measure it would be preferable to withdraw the earlier notification of 18.9.1979 along with the later notification of 22.2.1995 in order to avoid any potential claims that because of the withdrawal of only the later notification, the earlier one stands revived);

4-Even if the statutory body is dissolved, the Federal Government would still retain effective control over the regulation of cricket in Pakistan through the wide powers available to the President of Pakistan in his capacity as the Patron under the Articles of Association of PCB, the company.

5-PCB, the corporate entity, has in the past performed functions for the regulation of cricket in Pakistan without any serious objection from any quarters. There is no reason why it could not continue to so operate in future, and that too under the effective control of the Government.

Source:: Dawn (https://dawn.com/)