The Supreme Court on Friday directed the BCCI to pay Rs 2.5 crore to the Himachal Pradesh State Cricket Association (HPCA) in pursuance of its contractual obligation for the hosting of the fourth Test match between India and Australia at Dharamsala from Saturday.
Directing the payment of Rs 2.5 crores to HPCA, the bench of Justice Dipak Misra, Justice AM Khanwilkar and Justice DY Chandrachud in its order said, "It is directed that the BCCI shall honour the terms and conditions postulated in the contracts with the State Associations in letter and spirit so that there is no impediment in holding the test matches and ODIs."
The court further said that BCCI would honour its contractual commitments in the conduct of IPL matches that would commence from 5 April and would be held at 10 venues.
"After the (tripartite) contracts are executed (for holding IPL matches), following the principle of parity, the BCCI shall also honour the contractual terms. Needless to say, when we say that BBCCI shall honour its commitment, there has to be sincere commitment of honouring the terms and conditions of the contract by all the parties to the contract", the bench said in its order on Friday.
Having directed the apex cricketing body to discharge its contractual obligation towards HPCA, other state associations and IPL, the court clarified and reiterated its 20 January 2017, order by which a person can be an office bearer of the BCCI and the state cricket association for nine years each.
“To us, the direction and order passed by this court was absolutely clear and if we permit ourselves to say so, it was clear as a cloudless sky. However, to dispel any kind of doubt, we proceed to re-state the clarification”, the bench said.
"... if an office bearer has completed nine years in any post in the BCCI, he shall stand disqualified to become an office bearer of the BCCI. Similarly, if a person holds the post of office bearer in any capacity for any State Association for nine years, he shall stand disqualified for contesting or holding any post or office of the State Association", the bench said in its clarification.
It further said by way of illustration that "To avoid any kind of maze, we proceed to state by giving an example. If a person has held the post of office bearer in respect of a State Association for a period of nine years, he will not be disqualified to contest for the post of office bearer of the BCCI."
The court's clarification came as Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi, senior counsel Kapil Sibal appearing for the Maharashtra Cricket Association, said that despite the 20 January clarification, the Committee of Administrators running the affairs of the BCCI is saying that it was not clear.
The Attorney General had appeared for the Railways, tri-services and the Association of Universities seeking revisiting of the top order that took away their voting rights in the BCCI and direction that no minister or a government official could be associated with the cricket association.
He wondered how the secretary, Ministry of Railways, could be kept away from the Railway Sports Promotion Board.
On the larger issues involving the voting rights of Railways, tri-services and the Association of Universities and different state cricket associations complying with the Justice Lodha Committee recommendations, the court said that it would hear them on 14 July 2017.