JOIN USThe Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) on Thursday submitted before the Supreme Court a list of players, including former captains Sunil Gavaskar, Kris Srikkanth, Sourav Ganguly and Anil Kumble, who have commercial interest in the Indian Premier League (IPL).
Board president-in-exile N Srinivasan claimed that conflict of interest was not a public policy and could arise due to a situation. The apex court reserved its order on the matter.
A bench of Justices T S Thakur and F M I Kalifullah wrapped up the marathon hearing on a host of issues including the fate of Srinivasan and the quantum of sentence to be handed down against those found guilty of betting during IPL 2013 by the court-appointed Mudgal panel.
The court concluded its hearing on the petition filed by the derecognised Cricket Association of Bihar, with the BCCI submitting a list of players and administrators that includes former great Ravi Shastri as well.
Going through the list which also named Brijesh Patel, Anil Kumble, Kris Srikkanth, Venkatesh Prasad and Lalchand Rajput, the court wondered how those people joined cricket administration with commercial interest in the IPL.
“If you have commercial interest in the IPL or any other format, then you should not be in the administration,” the bench said.
Senior advocate C A Sundaram, appearing for the BCCI, submitted the list showing how several people were having some or the other potential commercial interests in the IPL.
If the court decided to strike down amendment to the rule 6.2.4, these people would also be affected.
“Some of them are doing commentary and players like Kumble and Srikkanth are the mentors of IPL teams Mumbai Indians and Sunrisers Hyderabad respectively,” Sundaram said.
The court, however, picked the name of Srikkanth who is also a mentor of Sunrisers Hyderabad (IPL team).
“He is in the national team selection committee. He is also mentor of an IPL team. How did you ever think of keeping him there? We are after all talking about the selection of talent for the national team here,” the bench asked counsel.
“How can you keep him there (in the selection panel). How will you justify that,” the bench further asked.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Srinivasan, submitted that the world of cricket changed because of the BCCI in the past 10 years. He further said: “Conflict of interest is not a public policy but it is a situation which may arise in future. It is a statutory right and the court cannot forbid anyone (from participating in process) unless law permitted.”