Cricket board as State? Centre may as well have checked with Rajasthan

The unprecedented ordinance, promulgated on August 18, prompted the Rajasthan Cricket Association to file a writ petition before the State High Court, challenging its validity.

But the State Government—headed by the sister of former BCCI president, the late Madhavrao Scindia—hit back in its counter affidavit by levelling serious charges about the way the president of the cricket association, Kishen Rungta, was running it as the ‘‘personal fiefdom of one family.’’

The Government’s counter affidavit alleged that the membership of the cricket association was dominated by members of Rungta’s family, his friends and relatives and, therefore, it could not ‘‘by any imagination be said to be representing the state.’’

In a tacit reference to rival factions of the cricket association led by Rungta and Lalit Modi, the Government said the ordinance seeks to amicably resolve disputes arising ‘‘within and between’’ various sports bodies ‘‘relating to affiliation and elections which end up in litigation and divert the attention of sports persons from achieving excellence.’’

Questioning the contribution of the cricket association to the development of the game in the state, the Government said: ‘‘Day in and day out, the newspapers are splashed with the bickering amongst so-called members and cricket fraternity. From the composition of the executive committee of the association, it is clear that it is a personal fiefdom of one family.’’

Explaining the rationale of the ordinance, the Government said that a lot of sports associations are using the name ‘Rajasthan’ or holding out to be representing the state ‘‘without factually acting in a representative capacity’’ which would have required them to conduct their affairs in a ‘‘transparent, professional and accountable’’ manner.

The Rajasthan ordinance codifies much of what the Centre counsel, Mohan Parasaran, said in the apex court supporting the right of Zee TV to file a writ petition against BCCI in connection with the telecast dispute.

A five-judge bench headed by Justice Santosh Hegde will resume hearing arguments on Tuesday on Zee TV’s radical proposition that BCCI should be subjected to judicial review as it performed a public function with a governmental character and it enjoyed a state-sanctioned monopoly over the administration of cricket.

Coincidentally, the Delhi High Court is due to deliver its judgment on the same legal question on Monday on a PIL that has been pending for four years. BCCI is set to remain in news even as the Test series with Australia begins on Wednesday.