New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the state associations and office-bearers of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) to give their suggestions on the draft constitution that will govern the cricketing body, before 11 May.

The draft constitution would have to adhere with the reforms suggested by the Lodha panel encompassing a “one state, one vote" formula that seeks to prevent states with multiple cricket associations from casting more than one vote, an age cap for office-bearers", among others.

Regarding elections of the Maharashtra Cricket Association (MCA) that were slated to take place on Wednesday, Chief Justice Dipak Misra said, “First focus on the core issue, that is drafting the constitution." It, however, asked the MCA to defer the elections to a later date.

Additional solicitor general Tushar Mehta, counsel for MCA, had requested the MCA elections not to be stayed as the BCCI was in the process of changing the constitution. He also submitted a chart to the court elaborating on how the recommendations of the Lodha panel were being duly considered under the draft constitution.

The court also disposed of a contempt petition by the Cricket Association of Bihar against BCCI officials for not implementing its earlier order allowing Bihar to participate in the Ranji trophy matches and other national level tournaments. On 30 October, 2017, a first copy of the draft constitution of the BCCI was submitted in the apex court in a sealed cover, incorporating suggestions of the Lodha panel to reform the cricket body.

The court had said the draft constitution should include suggestions of the Lodha panel in its entirety and asked for a holistic document to be placed before it for approval.

In January 2015, the apex court appointed a committee headed by retired justice R.M. Lodha to suggest reforms for BCCI as well as determine punishments for those guilty in the IPL spot-fixing case.

The committee recommended several sweeping changes in the BCCI including a “one state, one vote" formula that seeks to prevent states with multiple cricket associations from casting more than one vote, an age cap for office-bearers, and a ban on civil servants being part of the board, which has seen stiff resistance from the cricketing body.

The case will be heard next on 11 May.

Close