SC sets aside life ban on ex cricketer over Lodha Panel bylaw demand

Santosh Karunakaran had urged Ombudsman for bringing in model bylaws for all districts in the State in line with the Lodha Committee recommendations.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has quashed the Kerala Cricket Association's (KCA) acts of blacklisting and imposing life ban upon a former Ranji trophy player Santosh Karunakaran just after he urged the Ombudsman for bringing in model bylaws for all districts in the State in line with the Lodha Committee recommendations and adopted by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI).

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta also set aside the Kerala High Court's decision refusing to interfere into the matter.

The appellant, a former Ranji Trophy player, who represented the State of Kerala and member of Thiruvananthapuram District Cricket Association had approached the Ombudsman for framing a model bylaw. 

He also sought a direction to the Kerala Cricket Association (KCA) to implement the bylaw as framed by the Ombudsman forum in all the District units under KCA. He urged for a direction to the KCA to conduct elections by ensuring representation from each district under the KCA strictly in conformity with the byelaws framed.

On October 3, 2020, the Ombudsman-cum-Ethics Officer, rejected his original application on the ground that he failed to implead the District Cricket Associations despite clear directions.

He approached the High Court, which declined to provide any relief to him.

Upon rejection of his writ appeal, the KCA issued a show cause notice to him under Section 15(4)(s) of its bylaws. Karunakaran replied to the show cause notice on July 24, 2021. However, the KCA held a Special General Meeting on August 8, 2021, to discuss the action to be taken against the appellant.

By e-mail of August 22, 2021, the KCA communicated its decision to blacklist the appellant from all activities and imposed a life ban on him, thereby disassociating him from the KCA and its affiliated units and forfeiting all his rights and privileges as a registered member of the TDCA. 

In its judgment, the bench said, "The Kerala High Court has taken a very harsh view in rejecting the writ petition and the writ appeal preferred by the appellant on the purported ground of concealment of material facts concluding that he had approached the writ court with unclean hands".

The court held the appellant had made out a plausible case to suggest that the proceedings before the Ombudsman were non-transparent and that the copies of the relevant records/orders were not provided to him. 

The court also noted the documents and communications placed on record also suggested that many a times, it became difficult for the appellant and his counsel to address the Ombudsman during the proceedings of the original application because the virtual hearing gateway was frequently interrupted without any justification.

"The order of August 2, 2019, passed by the Ombudsman observing that the impleadment of the DCAs may entail unnecessary delay, definitely gave rise to a reasonable belief to the appellant that he was not under any obligation to implead the DCAs in the original application filed before the Ombudsman. Otherwise also, the only prayer of the appellant in the original application was to frame uniform Bylaws in sync with the recommendations of the Justice R M Lodha Committee," the court said.

The court found the application filed by the appellant was not in form of any adversarial litigation requiring the mandatory opportunity of hearing to the DCAs.

After setting aside the orders by the High Court, the court revived the proceedings before the Ombudsman for consideration afresh within three months.