IPL 2026: RCB fast bowler approaches court for playing rights

Thushara filed its petition in the Colombo District Court on April 2, naming top SLC officials – including Chairman Shammi Silva and CEO Ashley De Silva – as respondents. The case is scheduled to be heard on April 9, and could set an important precedent for the way player availability is handled in franchise cricket.

At the heart of the controversy is SLC’s refusal to issue a No Objection Certificate (NOC), which is mandatory for players to participate in foreign leagues like the IPL.

Fitness controversy at the center of controversy

According to Sri Lanka Cricket, Thushara was not given the NOC because he could not meet the newly implemented fitness standards. The board has implemented a points-based system, where players are required to score a minimum of 17 points out of 29 across five fitness standards to be eligible for overseas leagues.

This policy has also been applied to other players, including high-profile names like Mathisha Pathirana and Wanindu Hasaranga, who have suffered injuries recently.

However, Thushara has strongly challenged this decision. “My fitness has been stable” This has been his central argument, as he insists that there has been no deterioration in his physical condition. He also pointed out that he had not faced any problem in getting NOC under similar circumstances for the previous IPL seasons of 2024 and 2025.

Adding another layer to the controversy, Thushara revealed that his central contract with SLC had expired on March 31, 2026, and he had already informed the board about non-renewal of it. From his perspective, this means he is no longer bound by national commitments.

“I was told I was not in the national selection plans” This is another significant claim he has made, raising the question as to why the board would limit his participation if he is not part of their future plans.

Impact on franchise cricket

For Thushara, the consequences of this decision go beyond missing a few matches. He has argued in the court that failure to obtain the NOC could lead to RCB terminating his contract, leading to financial loss and loss of career opportunities.

Through his petition, he is seeking official recognition of his right to obtain NOC as well as immediate and long-term orders for the SLC to grant him approval.

Meanwhile, RCB have started the IPL 2026 campaign on a strong note, Has registered a comfortable win against Sunrisers Hyderabad (SRH). However, Thushara’s absence could impact their bowling depth, especially in the death overs, where his unique slinging action – often compared with Lasith Malinga – makes him a valuable asset.

Looking at his track record, Thushara has been a steady performer in T20 cricket. Having made his international debut in 2022, he has represented Sri Lanka in 30 T20Is. In all T20 competitions, he has taken 174 wickets in 137 matches, with an average of 21.25. He was also a part of RCB’s title-winning team in 2025, although he got limited playing time.

Apart from the personal matter, this legal battle gives rise to a bigger conversation in the cricket world. This raises important questions about how much control boards should have over players, particularly when they are not centrally contracted or part of national schemes.

With the court hearing scheduled for April 9, the outcome could have significant implications – not just for Thushara, but also for players who depend on franchise leagues for opportunities.

Whether the court rules in his favor or supports the authority of the board, the case highlights the growing tension between player freedom and administrative control in modern cricket.

For now, all eyes are on Colombo as the cricket world waits to see if Thushara gets the green signal to join RCB – or if his IPL 2026 journey ends before it even begins.