The Supreme Court today accepted most of the recommendations made by the committee headed by former Chief Justice of India, RM Lodha..A Bench comprising Chief Justice TS Thakur and Justice FML Kalifulla delivered its verdict a few minutes back..In its judgment, the court has discussed in detail, the argument by the petitioners that the recommendations by the Lodha committee are violative of Article 19(1)(c) – the right to form a union or association..Since the right is available only to citizens and not juristic persons or non-citizens, the BCCI and intervening associations had argued that even when the provisions of Article 19(1)(c) may not be available to the State Cricket Associations who are members of BCCI, yet the recommendations made by the Committee, if accepted, would prejudicially affect the citizens who have come together to form such State associations. Therefore, it was contended that the Court could, in its discretion, lift the veil to determine whether the right of any citizen/citizens was affected and grant suitable relief if the answer was in the affirmative..The court categorically turned down this submission and held the following:.“We say so, firstly because no citizen has come forward in the present proceedings or in the earlier round to complain of the violation of any fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution. Secondly and more importantly because the recommendations do not, in our opinion, affect the composition of the State Cricket Associations in any manner. Citizens who have come together to form the State Associations continue to associate as before with no change in their internal composition….. What is, however, important is that the right under Article 19(1)(c) does not extend to guaranting to the citizens the concomitant right to pursue their goals and objects uninhibited by any regulatory or other control. The legal position in this regard is settled by several decisions of this Court..”.The Court held that the recommendations made by the Committee in the instant case do not interfere with or alter the composition of the State Associations..“Individual citizens who came together to form the State Associations have not been asked to discontinue their association nor do the recommendations impose upon their members an obligation to associate with others with whom they do not wish to associate. Composition of the State Cricket Associations remain unaffected, and so does the right of those forming such Associations under Article 19(1)(c). That being so, the grievance sought to be made on behalf of citizens who have formed the State Associations does not stand scrutiny”.The Court then proceeded to consider the slew of recommendations made by the Lodha committee and accepted most of the suggestions..The Court accepted the recommendation that Ministers and Civil servants should not be allowed to be office bearers in BCCI or State cricket associations. The recommendation of having an age cap of 70 years for office bearers of BCCI and State cricket associations was also accepted..The Court also accepted the Lodha committee’s recommendation of ‘one State one vote’. States which currently have more than one vote like Maharashtra will be allowed to vote on rotational basis – with one State association allowed to have one vote at a time..Regarding the recommendation that nominee of Comptroller and Auditor General be included in the apex council of BCCI, the Court rejected BCCI’s submission that the same might result in suspension of BCCI from ICC..“Far from finding fault with presence of a nominee of the Accountant General of the State and C&AG, the ICC would in our opinion appreciate any such step for the same would prevent misgivings about the working of the BCCI especially in relation to management of its funds and bring transparency and objectivity necessary to inspire public confidence in the fairness and the effective management of the affairs of the BCCI and the State Associations”, the Court held..Importantly, the Court did not opine on whether BCCI will come within the ambit of the Right to Information Act. Instead, it has left it to the Parliament to decide the same. Justice Lodha will oversee the transition of BCCI into this new framework – a process which has to be completed within six months.
The Supreme Court today accepted most of the recommendations made by the committee headed by former Chief Justice of India, RM Lodha..A Bench comprising Chief Justice TS Thakur and Justice FML Kalifulla delivered its verdict a few minutes back..In its judgment, the court has discussed in detail, the argument by the petitioners that the recommendations by the Lodha committee are violative of Article 19(1)(c) – the right to form a union or association..Since the right is available only to citizens and not juristic persons or non-citizens, the BCCI and intervening associations had argued that even when the provisions of Article 19(1)(c) may not be available to the State Cricket Associations who are members of BCCI, yet the recommendations made by the Committee, if accepted, would prejudicially affect the citizens who have come together to form such State associations. Therefore, it was contended that the Court could, in its discretion, lift the veil to determine whether the right of any citizen/citizens was affected and grant suitable relief if the answer was in the affirmative..The court categorically turned down this submission and held the following:.“We say so, firstly because no citizen has come forward in the present proceedings or in the earlier round to complain of the violation of any fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution. Secondly and more importantly because the recommendations do not, in our opinion, affect the composition of the State Cricket Associations in any manner. Citizens who have come together to form the State Associations continue to associate as before with no change in their internal composition….. What is, however, important is that the right under Article 19(1)(c) does not extend to guaranting to the citizens the concomitant right to pursue their goals and objects uninhibited by any regulatory or other control. The legal position in this regard is settled by several decisions of this Court..”.The Court held that the recommendations made by the Committee in the instant case do not interfere with or alter the composition of the State Associations..“Individual citizens who came together to form the State Associations have not been asked to discontinue their association nor do the recommendations impose upon their members an obligation to associate with others with whom they do not wish to associate. Composition of the State Cricket Associations remain unaffected, and so does the right of those forming such Associations under Article 19(1)(c). That being so, the grievance sought to be made on behalf of citizens who have formed the State Associations does not stand scrutiny”.The Court then proceeded to consider the slew of recommendations made by the Lodha committee and accepted most of the suggestions..The Court accepted the recommendation that Ministers and Civil servants should not be allowed to be office bearers in BCCI or State cricket associations. The recommendation of having an age cap of 70 years for office bearers of BCCI and State cricket associations was also accepted..The Court also accepted the Lodha committee’s recommendation of ‘one State one vote’. States which currently have more than one vote like Maharashtra will be allowed to vote on rotational basis – with one State association allowed to have one vote at a time..Regarding the recommendation that nominee of Comptroller and Auditor General be included in the apex council of BCCI, the Court rejected BCCI’s submission that the same might result in suspension of BCCI from ICC..“Far from finding fault with presence of a nominee of the Accountant General of the State and C&AG, the ICC would in our opinion appreciate any such step for the same would prevent misgivings about the working of the BCCI especially in relation to management of its funds and bring transparency and objectivity necessary to inspire public confidence in the fairness and the effective management of the affairs of the BCCI and the State Associations”, the Court held..Importantly, the Court did not opine on whether BCCI will come within the ambit of the Right to Information Act. Instead, it has left it to the Parliament to decide the same. Justice Lodha will oversee the transition of BCCI into this new framework – a process which has to be completed within six months.
