Settling scores with the ghost of World Cup 8217;96

MUMBAI, AUG 13: It was meant to keep tally during the heady days of the Wills World Cup match played at the Wankhede Stadium at Churchgat...

MUMBAI, AUG 13: It was meant to keep tally during the heady days of the Wills World Cup match played at the Wankhede Stadium at Churchgate in 1996. However, the giant electronic scoreboard has since been keeping score of another game being played off the field. Here, the gloves are off, the googlies more deadly and the allegations over the scoreboard8217;s purchase and consequent financial losses are threatening to run out two members of the Mumbai Cricket Association MCA.

The slanging match over the purchase of the MegaVision electronic scoreboard at a cost of Rs 5 crore from Hungary has finally hit a speed-breaker, with the City Civil Court ordering a stay on an inquiry by Justice Retd Hosbet Suresh instituted by the MCA into the deal. The July 15, 1999, stay has been granted till such time as a suit challenging a May 1998, Special Annual General Meeting resolution of the MCA holding former managing committee members Shripad Halbe and Ravi Mandrekar responsible, is disposed of.

Halbe and Mandrekar, whohave been held responsible for causing the MCA financial losses over the scoreboard8217;s purchase, could therefore face expulsion from the prestigious association for 15 years. Both say the allegations are malafide and accuse the managing committee of playing beyond the rules.

The video matrix scoreboard was purchased from Hungary on lease finance from SICOM for Rs 5 crore in 1995. Duties and taxes amounting to Rs 3 crore were waived after MCA Joint Secretary Bal Mahaddalkar gave an undertaking to the Customs that the board would not be commercially exploited except for sports activities. However, this as well as the MCA8217;s consequent non-payment of lease dues have reduced the scoreboard to a white elephant today.

In May 1998, the MCA passed a resolution holding Halbe and Mandrekar responsible for the losses. Halbe then filed a suit in the City Civil Court on June 15, 1998, challenging the resolution. The MCA consequently served Halbe and Mandrekar show-cause notices in September 1998, asking them why theyshould not be expelled for eliminating the option to generate additional revenue from the scoreboard by 8220;inducing8221; Mahaddalkar to sign the undertaking with the Customs.

They have also been accused of making certain payments to SICOM and TARC-MT Visual, the Indian counterpart of the parent, MT-Visual, Hungary, which supplied the scoreboard, without the MCA8217;s permission.

In their replies Halbe and Mandrekar denied the charges, asking why Mahaddalkar, who had signed the Customs undertaking, Joint Secretary Pravin Barve and Shailesh Wagh not an MCA member, son-in-law of MCA President and former chief minister Manohar Joshi, were let off the hook. They were referring to the failure of a Rs 4-crore sponsorship deal with Nippon Denro Ispat Limited, which had applied for exclusive advertisement rights on the scoreboard during the World Cup. Halbe and Mandrekar had, however, pointed out that the deal was scrapped after Barve and Wagh asked Nippon to shell out an additional Rs 1 crore.

Story continues below this ad

On June 25, 1999, theMCA appointed Justice Suresh to probe the failure8217; of the scoreboard, after holding Halbe and Mandrekar responsible. On July 14, Halbe moved a notice of motion in the City Civil Court, urging it to expedite the case and grant a stay on the inquiry. He contended that the May 1998 resolution did not authorise the MCA to order an inquiry into the matter.

Halbe had claimed in court that the MCA8217;s inquiry is 8220;selective8221; so that 8220;their managing committee favourite persons would be protected and inconvenient things hidden8221;. He said on July 26, 1995, the MCA had decided to put Mandrekar and him in charge of the project, authorising them to take the necessary decisions pertaining to the scoreboard. However, when the then managing committee8217;s term ended in August 1996, both were excluded from the project. Moreover, Halbe submitted, the MCA had not specified the losses that allegedly accrued due to their actions.

Besides, he states that the MCA8217;s General Body had already accepted the statement of accountsregarding the scoreboard March 27, 1998. He also points out that by issuing the show-cause notices prior to the inquiry, the MCA had pre-judged them.

On July 29, 1999, MCA Joint Secretary Ratnakar Shetty filed an affidavit, claiming the inquiry is independent of the May 1998 resolution and that it was instituted under Rule 15a of the MCA.

Story continues below this ad

When Express Newsline asked Shetty to comment, he declined. 8220;I cannot say anything. The matter is sub-judice.8221;