The Supreme Court has asked a big question to the Board of Control for Cricket in India i.e. BCCI and all the state cricket associations. The court has asked why BCCI and state cricket associations should not be brought under the ambit of the National Sports Governance Act, 2025. The court has sought answers from BCCI lawyers. A three-member bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant has asked this question to BCCI on Tuesday, September 8. This matter is in the court since 2014.
Supreme Court asked for answer
The Supreme Court has sought answers from the lawyers of BCCI and State Cricket Association as to why the tenure and conditions of service of the last office bearers should not be included in the National Sports Governance Act which came into force in 2025. It has become clear from the court’s statement that how BCCI and state cricket associations will be included in the new Sports Act.
This matter is in the court since 2014 and from time to time the Supreme Court keeps asking questions to BCCI. In this matter, the court has also taken many important steps to improve the cricket administration of BCCI. Earlier, former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court R.M. A committee was formed under the leadership of Lodha. This committee was asked to take measures to reform BCCI and draft a new constitution for the cricket board. After this, the Supreme Court accepted the recommendations of the Lodha Committee and implemented provisions to improve the functioning of BCCI and State Cricket Association.
The court had given permission in the year 2022
In the year 2022, the court had allowed changes regarding the tenure of BCCI officials. Under this, any official in BCCI or State Cricket Association could hold the post for 12 years. Under this rule, any officer could reduce the tenure of 6 years in BCCI and 6 years in State Cricket Association continuously. After this, a cooling-off period of three years i.e. the period of being out of office was imposed.
Any officer can work in BCCI and State Cricket Association for two consecutive years. After this, it was asked to complete the cooling off period. Earlier, the court had kept a mandatory cooling-off period of three years for officials who have completed two consecutive three-year terms. Now the Supreme Court has sought a clear answer as to how the provisions of the National Sports Governance Act will be implemented on BCCI and state cricket associations?