Senior Advocate Mihir Thakore cited Section 36 of the Representation of the People’s Act to submit that the provisions of the Act pertaining to the presence of the candidate were “contrary” to the submission of the BCA.
The Baroda Cricket Association (BCA) – an affiliate of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) – Thursday submitted to the Gujarat High Court that it would “not reject the nomination” of city-based Dr Darshan Banker for the post of the president of the cricket body, on the ground of his absence on the day of the scrutiny of nomination forms on January 20, which coincides with Banker’s son’s destination wedding in Goa.
Justice N R Mehta of the Gujarat High Court orally disposed of the petition after advocate Kabir Hathi, representing BCA, made submissions under instructions from a former office bearer and the legal officer of the Association.
After lengthy submissions made by the two advocates – Senior Advocate Mihir Thakore on behalf of the petitioner and Advocate Shah for the BCA – over the contentious clause of the election notice issued by the BCA on January 6, the high court disposed of the petition filed by Banker.
The Gujarat HC, in its oral order, said, “Advocate for Baroda Cricket Association, under instruction submitted that the nomination of the petitioner, Dr Darshan Navin Banker, shall not be rejected on the ground of not remaining present during the scrutinisation of the nomination forms scheduled on January 20, 2026. Further submitted that one representative of Dr Banker shall be permitted to appear before the election officer during the scrutiny of nomination forms and shall be permitted to make representation if any objection raised and also shall be permitted to lodge his objection qua the nomination forms of other candidates.”
During the proceeding, the BCA submitted to the court that the contention of the petitioner that Clause G of the election notification making it mandatory for candidates to remain present for scrutiny was “a departure” from the previous years, was ‘erroneous’ as the previous election held in February 2023 had a similar clause. The high court, however, orally questioned the choice of words by the BCA in the current notification, observing that the clause of 2023 stating that “scrutiny of nominations will be conducted in presence of the candidates” did not have a binding effect like the notification of 2026 that states “candidates must remain present” at the time of the scrutiny of nominations.
Seeking justification for the insertion of the clause of mandatory presence of candidates from the BCA, Justice Mehta orally remarked, “You have all powers, there is no dispute about your powers. But the powers have to be exercised to see that the process is effective and in a more democratic manner… Show me why the presence (of this candidate) is required.”
Advocate Hathi, on instructions from the BCA officials present at the hearing, informed the court that the Constitution of the Association had “nothing… that talks about the presence of the candidate at the time of scrutiny of nominations…” but cited the 2019 report of the R M Lodha committee, which was appointed to reform the cricket administration in the associations across the country. Advocate Hathi also submitted the BCA’s contention that, as per the 2019 committee report, the BCA had appointed the mandatory Presiding Ombudsman – retired Justice AJ Desai – whom the petitioner had not approached before moving the HC in the matter.
Story continues below this ad
Senior Advocate Mihir Thakore cited Section 36 of the Representation of the People’s Act to submit that the provisions of the Act pertaining to the presence of the candidate were “contrary” to the submission of the BCA. Advocate Thakore submitted that Section 36 of the Act provides for candidates of an election “to be allowed to see other nomination papers to raise objections” and to “respond to objections raised by the Returning Officer or others” and not to make it mandatory for the candidate to remain present to ensure the approval of his own nomination form.
Stating orally that the “scrutiny of the nominations have to be in a purposeful manner”, the HC in its oral order also stated, “It is needless to clarify that the BCA is expected to hold the election in a fair and democratic manner.”
‘Pandora’s box’
Earlier, the BCA had implored the high court to “not treat (the petition) as a precedent as it will open a Pandora’s box” with several other members seeking relief of absence during the elections. Advocate Hathi informed the court that as the Women’s Premier League is scheduled to begin in Vadodara shortly, it had left “no time” for the BCA to issue fresh notice and therefore the petition of Dr Banker should be considered as an “individual case only”.
The Gujarat HC on January 9 had directed the BCA “not to reject” Banker’s nomination and also granted that “it would be open for the petitioner to send his representative to remain present during scrutiny scheduled on 20.01.2026.”
Aditi Raja is an Assistant Editor with The Indian Express, stationed in Vadodara, Gujarat, with over 20 years in the field. She has been reporting from the region of Central Gujarat and Narmada district for this newspaper since 2013, which establishes her as a highly Authoritative and Trustworthy source on regional politics, administration, and critical socio-economic and environmental issues.
Expertise:
Core Authority & Specialization: Her reporting is characterized by a comprehensive grasp of the complex factors shaping Central Gujarat, which comprises a vast tribal population, including:
Politics and Administration: In-depth analysis of dynamics within factions of political parties and how it affects the affairs in the region, visits of national leaders making prominent statements, and government policy decisions impacting the population on ground.
Crucial Regional Projects: She consistently reports on the socio-economic and political impact of infrastructure projects in the region, especially the Statue of Unity, the Sardar Sarovar Project on the Narmada River, the Mumbai-Ahmedabad High Speed Rail bullet train project as well as the National Highway infrastructure.
Social Justice and Human Rights: Her reporting offers deep coverage of sensitive human-interest topics, including gender, crime, and tribal issues. Her reports cover legal proceedings from various district courts as well as the Gujarat High Court (e.g., the Bilkis Bano case remission, POCSO court orders, Public Interest Litigations), the plight of tribal communities, and broader social conflicts (e.g., Kheda flogging case).
Local Impact & Disaster Reporting: Excels in documenting the immediate impact of events on communities, such as the political and civic fallout of the Vadodara floods, the subsequent public anger, and the long-delayed river redevelopment projects, Harni Boat Tragedy, Air India crash, bringing out a blend of stories from the investigations as well as human emotions.
Special Interest Beat: She tracks incidents concerning Non-Resident Gujaratis (NRIs) including crime and legal battles abroad, issues of illegal immigration and deportations, as well as social events connecting the local Gujarati experience to the global diaspora. ... Read More
