The season’s over but the big match is on

Forget the interviews for the coach’s job, shrug aside the latest bookie arrest. The real focus of the BCCI’s power players is on ...

Forget the interviews for the coach’s job, shrug aside the latest bookie arrest. The real focus of the BCCI’s power players is on the High Court in Shimla, and a relatively obscure case that could decide the future of Indian cricket.

First a recap. In September 2004, Ranbir Singh Mahendra defeated Sharad Pawar to become BCCI president. He won by 16 votes to 15, after one voter was disenfranchised and Dalmiya put in a casting vote.

A fresh BCCI election is due in September 2005. The Dalmiya-Arun Jaitley and Pawar-I.S. Bindra camps are already sharpening strategies. The key lies in three court cases:

CASE I

Govt of Rajasthan vs Rajasthan Cricket Association

Story continues below this ad

THE NUB: The Rajasthan government issued an ordinance that said individual members at the RCA couldn’t vote, only affiliated district units could. This unseated the Rungta family and paved the way for Lalit Modi to become president

STATUS: The High Court in Jaipur upheld the law. The Rungtas have now appealed to the Supreme Court, where the case will be heard on May 20

PERSONALITY CLASH: The Rungtas, father P.M. and son Kishore, are old Dalmiya buddies. Lalit Modi, elected RCA chief under the new but disputed rules, is a businessman close to Pawar, Bindra and Chief Minister Vasundhara Raje (BJP).

CASE II

Govt of Uttar Pradesh vs UPCA

THE NUB: A replica law that seeks to enfranchise only district units, give government control of the state cricket body

Story continues below this ad

STATUS: Was meant to be heard by the Allahabad High Court on May 17, but hearing was postponed

PERSONALITY CLASH: Pits pro-Dalmiya Rajeev Shukla (currently BCCI vice-president and Congress MP) against Amar Singh, Samajwadi Party general secretary. At stake is the right to vote in the all-important BCCI election. Meanwhile a top industrialist and UPCA bigiwig, with business interests in Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh, has been ‘‘advised’’ by functionaries in two state governments to jump ship

CASE III

Govt of Himachal Pradesh vs HPCA

THE NUB: A near-identical Act that, in effect, makes the HPCA a state government department

STATUS: On May 18, the Shimla High Court ruled that pending the hearing of the case, the HPCA could ignore the Act

Story continues below this ad

PERSONALITY CLASH: Under threat is Anurag Thakur, HPCA chief and son of P.K. Dhumal, former BJP chief minister. The government wants to replace him with Virbhadra Singh (Congress), the current chief minister, or his nominee.

THE BIG PICTURE

All three state units were pro-Dalmiya in 2004. If even two go, the tables turn at the BCCI. Given the common legal principles, it is expected either all three will stay or all three will be lost.

The state governments are being accused of trying to take over autonomous civil society institutions, interfering in BCCI politics by using state power to help one faction. In Rajasthan, for instance, Modi’s election was allegedly facilitated by district magistrates who decided who would vote on behalf of the district units.

The governments, on the other hand, plead they want to make cricket bodies more accountanble and promote the game in the countryside. One view will prevail, watch this space till September.