<p>Srinivasan has been in the eye of a storm in the last few days, his detractors pointing out that being Board secretary and thus a member of the IPL Governing Council was a conflict of interest with his capacity as the owner of the Chennai Super Kings.<br /><br />Brushing aside the need for an inquiry in this regard, Manohar said: “The simple answer is that the concept was discussed in the Board, that time (during the first bid process for franchises) there was no bidder. Even the Board was sceptical about the fate of the IPL. Srinivasan officially sought permission from the then president Sharad Pawar to give a bid, and Pawar gave him permission. After the bid was accepted, all the bids came for approval before the general body and the panel approved the bids.<br /><br />“Now, Srinivasan is not a majority shareholder in India Cements,” Manohar added. “Today, media is showing that this is being challenged in the Supreme Court, but this issue was raised by A C Muthiah in the Madras High Court in 2008 after he was defeated by Srinivasan in the presidential elections of the Tamil Nadu Cricket Association. He lost the case before a single judge, he lost before a division bench in appeal, and now he is in appeal before the SC. So there’s nothing new in what’s happening, this has happened three years ago.”</p>
<p>Srinivasan has been in the eye of a storm in the last few days, his detractors pointing out that being Board secretary and thus a member of the IPL Governing Council was a conflict of interest with his capacity as the owner of the Chennai Super Kings.<br /><br />Brushing aside the need for an inquiry in this regard, Manohar said: “The simple answer is that the concept was discussed in the Board, that time (during the first bid process for franchises) there was no bidder. Even the Board was sceptical about the fate of the IPL. Srinivasan officially sought permission from the then president Sharad Pawar to give a bid, and Pawar gave him permission. After the bid was accepted, all the bids came for approval before the general body and the panel approved the bids.<br /><br />“Now, Srinivasan is not a majority shareholder in India Cements,” Manohar added. “Today, media is showing that this is being challenged in the Supreme Court, but this issue was raised by A C Muthiah in the Madras High Court in 2008 after he was defeated by Srinivasan in the presidential elections of the Tamil Nadu Cricket Association. He lost the case before a single judge, he lost before a division bench in appeal, and now he is in appeal before the SC. So there’s nothing new in what’s happening, this has happened three years ago.”</p>
