Premium
This is an archive article published on September 29, 2004

Zee writ has no meaning: BCCI to SC

On the eve of its politically surcharged election, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) today pleaded before the Supreme Court t...

.

On the eve of its politically surcharged election, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) today pleaded before the Supreme Court that no writ petition could be filed against it as it was not an authority of the State. This preliminary objection to Zee TV’s writ petition consumed the first day of the hearing before a five-judge Constitution bench in the run-up to the Indo-Australia cricket series starting next week.

BCCI’s counsel K K Venugopal argued that the board could not be held to account on any writ petition because, being a private society, it was not part of ‘‘ the State’’ within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution.

This is a bone of contention as the definition of ‘‘the State’’ in Article 12 includes not just the Government but also ‘‘all local or other authorities within the territory of India.’’

Story continues below this ad

Zee TV’s counsel Harish Salve asserted that BCCI fell within ‘‘other authorities’’ as it was the regulatory body of cricket and sole representative of India as a country at all levels of the game and the team fielded by it plays as India.

But the thrust of Venugopal’s submissions was that BCCI could not be subjected to writ jurisdiction as it had no links with the Government and did not receive any grant from the Government. All that the Government did, he said, was to recognise BCCI as the apex national body to regulate the game of cricket. The arguments before the bench headed by Justice Santosh Hegde will resume tomorrow.

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement