Time for MCA to get its cricketing act right

The issue in question concerned the AGM’s clearance for changes to a sub- rule of Rule 25 of the MCA constitution. If approved, it would have meant that no managing committee or sub-committee member of Garware Club House, either paid or honorary, would be eligible to contest the election of the MCA.If the 300-odd members had given their consent to this move, unmindful of its consequences, then the very election of Sharad Pawar, also the head of the Garware Club House, could well have been ruled null and void.

Clearly, this would have been against the very fundamental right enshrined in the Constitution of India which gives every individual the freedom to be associated with any organisation for its welfare and does not bar one from being an office-bearer of two bodies at the same time.

More importantly, the proposal was also quite absurd in the sense that the president of Garware (Pawar) had already contested the MCA election, the counting of votes for which was in progress at the time of the meeting.

When the proposal was tabled at the AGM, some members asked for changes to the suggested clause, but Shripad Halbe representing the Oriental Cricket Club strongly objected to its introduction. He said the change was being sought with malicious intent to prevent Pawar from holding the office of MCA president.

He even accused the chairman of the meeting, Manohar Joshi, of engineering the move. ‘‘Is it being drafted in such a way that Mr Pawar can never enter the MCA fold? Besides, can you apply this in retrospective effect?,’’ he asked the ruling body, adding ‘‘please don’t expose yourself.’’

Halbe then sought the view of the members on the issue before a final decision was taken.

Ravi Sawant of Aarey Cricket Club felt that Halbe had stretched the matter a little too far but supported the claim saying there was no way MCA could apply the rule. Moreover, he said if Garware too has such a rule, it should be challenged in a court of law. Finally a decision was taken to seek a legal opinion on the matter before it is brought up again at the next meeting.

The whole argument, however, presented the MCA in poor light with Garware Club House issue still continuing to rule over its meetings. The legal dispute over the years has seen MCA lose track of its objectives to promote the game. MCA’s sub-tenant Garware has been a pain in its neck for over two decades now both bodies seeking independent identities sharing the same premises.

With the new president promising to bring about an end to the long standing dispute, it would be interesting to know how he would go about it. For Pawar will need the veto of the general body of not only MCA but Garware as well and that would be no easy task.

Pawar will also have to ensure that the age-old constitution of MCA is given a new shape. It is surprising to note that the AGM is held just after the elections when there can be affairs that need be discussed prior to the holding of office by the elected members.

Sadly, in all this commotion to grab official posts and take Garware to task, the concerns of club members received little attention.

Bharat Bhandare of New Hind Cricket Club was very correct in saying that while MCA wasted lot of money (Rs 47,12,024 to be precise) on legal fees in the dispute with Garware, his team had to struggle to procure tarpaulins for the semi-permanent structures that will shield players during the monsoon. Something that also needs more attention than the legal matters.