Dalmiya now on SC146;s sticky wicket

The urgency displayed by the apex court8212;as also the high level at which the matter is being taken up8212;puts a question mark over all the last-minute and ad hoc plans announced by BCCI for telecasting the Indo-Australia cricket series starting on October 6.

Legally speaking, it indicates that the Constitution bench headed by Justice Santosh Hegde may once and for all lay down whether BCCI, despite being a private society, could be deemed to be an authority of the State because of its monopoly over the administration of the most popular and lucrative sport in the country.

A three-judge bench, headed by Justice Hegde today issued notices to the Centre, BCCI, Dalmiya, ESPN-Star Sports ESS and audit firm PricewaterhouseCoopers PwC, on the petition challenging the sudden cancellation on September 21 of the entire tender process in which Zee had emerged as the highest bidder for telecast of all cricket matches played in India the next four years.

It is significant that the Supreme Court is proceeding with the case even after BCCI8217;s counsel, K K Venugopal, clarified that there was no threat to the successive cricket series in the near future with Australia and South Africa as the board had arranged with Prasar Bharati to make live telcast of those matches in India.

While denying Zee TV8217;s allegation that Dalmiya had cancelled the contract in a mala fide manner to benefit ESS, Venugopal however conceded that as the domestic telecast rights have been given to Prasar Bharati, the international rights might be given to 8216;8216;somebody else.8217;8217;

Zee TV8217;s counsel, Harish Salve, began by asserting that the petition was not so much about who should get the telecast rights but whether BCCI could be allowed to get away with 8216;8216;a mockery of the decision-making process.8217;8217;

In a bid to substantiate his charge of mala fide, Salve pointed out that BCCI has so far not explained how Dalmiya could have cancelled the tender process superseding the board8217;s decision of September 5 to award the contract to Zee.

Salve contended that even otherwise, BCCI was not empowered to take any unilateral action after it had concluded the contract on September 5 and made Zee pay 20 million within 48 hours.

On Dalmiya8217;s alleged tilt towards ESS, Salve claimed that before the bidding, the BCCI president had called Zee chief Subhash Goel to enquire if he was making 8216;8216;an aggressive bid.8217;8217;

Meanwhile, ESPN-Star Sports today offered to produce and telecast the forthcoming Australia series, pass the net advertising revenues earned to BCCI. This, the channel claimed, would benefit the viewer, Doordarshan with whom it would have a 80:20 revenue sharing and the board.

8216;8216;Doordarshan gets its revenues and the viewer gets to see the matches,8217;8217; said R C Venkatesh of ESPN. 8216;8216;We will deposit all the advertising revenues after DD has taken its 20 per cent share with BCCI.8217;8217; said Venkateish.

In a letter addressed to BCCI, ESPN-Star Sports said: 8216;8216;We have an agreement in place with Prasar Bharati to carry the signal on Doordarshan. As you are aware, Zee has claimed only to have in-principle agreement, which has so far not been disclosed; we will give the BCCI all the net advertising revenues earned on our channel and net share of the DD revenues net of costs.8221;