JOIN US While examining charges of conflict of interest against BCCI president-in-exile N Srinivasan, the Supreme Court on Thursday wondered whether the issue would persist if Chennai Super Kings (CSK) is taken out of the Indian Premier League (IPL).
CSK is owned by Indian Cements Ltd (ICL), of which Srinivasan is managing director and vice-president. Further, his son-in-law Gurunath Meiyappan, who was found guilty of betting in IPL 2013 by the Justice Mukul Mudgal panel, is an “official” of the team.
Senior advocate Harish Salve, representing the Cricket Association of Bihar, had raised the issue and accused Srinivasan of introducing his son-in-law into the CSK.
A bench of Justices T S Thakur and F M I Kalifullah asked Salve if Srinivasan would still be conflicted if CSK were to go. “If the CSK goes, could there still be conflict of interest?” the bench said.
“We are not raising any allegations of betting against you (Srinivasan), but you introduced your son-in-law. ICL is your company, you have to be careful,” the counsel asserted.
During the hearing, the court wanted to know who owns CSK and who is responsible for selecting the team captain and players for the IPL. “If the ultimate controller of CSK is the ICL, which comprises of a board of directors having three members—one of whom is the wife of Meiyappan—the selection of the captain and coach is indirectly done by Meiyappan,” the bench said, brushing aside a plea that Srinvasan’s son-in-law had nothing to do with CSK’s affairs.
“He (Meiyappan) may be cricket enthusiast like many others. But the question is whether he is the ultimate controller of the team, regardless of that fact, and if he has any share-holdings,” the bench said.
During the hearing, the bench once again noted conflicts of interest in view of Srinivasan acting as BCCI president and the team owner. “Srinivasan, as president of the BCCI, had a duty to ensure that there was no corruption. But as a team owner, he wanted his team to remain in the reckoning. The conflict between duty as president and owner of the team is obvious,” the bench said.