BCCI seeks review of SC order

Board says bench had 'a prejudiced approach'

The BCCI on Tuesday filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking review of its July 18 verdict accepting recommendations of the Justice Lodha panel on reforms in the cricketing body.

The board said the bench, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) T S Thakur, had “a prejudiced approach” and he should recuse from hearing the matter. The BCCI also contended that the judgement was “unreasoned” and “seeks to frame legislative measures for a private autonomous society in a field already occupied by legislations, both parliamentary and state”. It further said that the judgement authored by the CJI and Justice F M I Kalifulla (since retired) has “neither noted the contentions and facts correctly nor dealt with the same”.

“The judgement is unconstitutional and contrary to many binding precedents of this court and adversely affects and nullifies the fundamental rights granted to citizens under Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution,” it said, adding: “The judgement outsources judicial power to a committee of retired judges, which is impermissible in law.”

“The judgement is a nullity as the judges were functus officio after passing the main judgement on January 22, 2015, and the matter could not have been revived suo motu as no provision of law empowers the same and is contrary to the doctrine of separation of powers and contrary to settled law that the judiciary cannot make laws,” the plea said.

However, the most important aspect of the review petition, which also demanded an open court hearing, is the plea for recusal of the CJI from the case. “Chief Justice T S Thakur seems to have a prejudiced approach to BCCI... the chief justice has a closed mind and will summarily dismiss the review petition without listing the same before another bench of five judges for hearing in the open court,” it said.

On July 18, the court had accepted major recommendations of the Lodha committee on reforms in the BCCI, including a bar on ministers and civil servants and those above 70 from becoming its members, but left it to Parliament to decide whether it should come under the RTI and if betting should be legalised.