REPORTABLE    

     IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA  CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION  

CIVIL APPEAL No. 4235 OF 2014    

Board of Control for Cricket     .....APPELLANTS  in India and Ors.         

 Versus  

 Cricket Association of Bihar & Ors.        .....RESPONDENTS  

With    

 CIVIL APPEAL No. 4236 OF 2014  

With    

 CIVIL APPEAL No. 1155 OF 2015  

With    

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 46 OF 2017    

 With

2    

 CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 47 OF 2017  

 In    

 CIVIL APPEAL No. 4235 OF 2014  

With    

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 287 OF 2017    

With    

CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 959 OF 2017    

In      

CIVIL APPEAL No. 1155 OF 2015    

With    

CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) No. 1835 OF 2017    

In  CIVIL APPEAL No. 4235 OF 2014  

J U D G M E N T    

 Dr D Y CHANDRACHUD, J           

1 While pronouncing its judgment on 18 July 2016 in Board of Control for  

Cricket in India v Cricket Association of Bihar1, this Court accepted the  

1(2015) 3 SCC 251

3    

reforms in the administration of cricket proposed by a Committee chaired by  

Justice RM Lodha2.  The review petition has been dismissed. On 2 January  

2017, this Court directed that a Committee of Administrators3 shall supervise  

the administration of BCCI through its Chief Executive Officer. The CoA was  

constituted on 17 January 2017. On 24 July 2017, this Court directed that except  

for certain outstanding issues which were identified, the recommendations of  

the Lodha Committee must be implemented:  

“...(c) All concerned shall implement the recommendations of  

the Justice Lodha Committee Report as far as practicable,  

barring the issues which have been raised pertaining to  

membership, number of members of the selection  

committee, concept of associate membership, etc. The  

purpose is to implement the report as far as practicable   

and, thereafter, it shall be debated as to how the scheme of  

things can be considered so that the cricket, the ‘gentleman’s  

game’, remains nearly perfect. Be it noted, the issue with  

regard to disqualification or qualification of the representative  

is kept open.”                                     (Emphasis supplied)  

On 23 August 2017, the CoA was entrusted to prepare a draft constitution in  

accordance with the judgment rendered on 18 July 2016 and the order dated 24  

July 2017. Modalities were evolved by this Court to consider the concerns of  

stakeholders by ensuring that the draft constitution is duly circulated between  

all the counsel so that their suggestions could be evaluated. This Court  

observed :    

2Abbreviated in this judgment as the Lodha Committee  

3Abbreviated as CoA

4    

“we…direct the Committee of Administrators to prepare a  

draft Constitution in terms of the main judgment as well as  

the order dated 24th July, 2017.  A copy of the draft  

Constitution shall be handed over to Advocate-on-Record  

assisting the learned counsel for the respondents. A copy of  

the draft Constitution be also handed over to Mr. B.K. Prasad,  

learned counsel assisting Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Solicitor  

General . Suggestions, if any, to the draft Constitution be  

handed over to the learned counsel assisting the learned  

Amicus Curiae and Mr. Parag P. Tripathi so that they can  

prepare a chart and will be in a position to give their comments.  

...  

On the next date of hearing, besides the three aspects that  

have been mentioned in the order dated 24th July, 2017,  

any aspect which is sought to be raised by the Association  

can be raised. But, it is to be impressed that the  

suggestion must have acceptable sanctity.  It should not  

be raised for the sake of raising an objection.” (Emphasis  

supplied)  

2 On 21 September 2017, the CoA made a grievance that quite apart from  

the fact that no suggestions were received, a concerted effort was made by the  

office bearers of BCCI not to abide by the judgment of the Court. Hence, on 21  

September 2017, the Court while recording the above submission extended  

another opportunity to receive suggestions to the draft constitution :  

“In the course of hearing, it is submitted by Mr. Parag P.  

Tripathi, learned senior counsel appearing for the Committee  

of Administrators that though a draft constitution was  

handed over to the office bearers of B.C.C.I. and also to all  

concerned, no suggestion has been received and a  

concerted attempt has been adopted by the office bearers  

of B.C.C.I. not to follow the judgment of this Court.  

We may hasten to add that in our previous order dated 24th  

July, 2017, we have clearly indicated that three to four  

aspects shall be debated. The suggestions in that regard can  

be given to Mr. Parag P. Tripathi, learned senior counsel  

appearing for the Committee of Administrators, Needless to  

emphasize, Mr. C.K. Khanna, Mr. Anirudh Chaudhry and Mr.  

Amitabh Choudhary, Office Bearers of B.C.C.I. shall fully

5    

cooperate while giving the suggestions. If the aforesaid three  

Office Bearers do not give suggestions in accordance with the  

judgment of this Court which has accepted the Justice Lodha  

Committee report, they shall face serious consequences. The  

draft constitution shall include the suggestions given by  

Justice Lodha Committee in its entirety so that a holistic  

document comes before this Court. After the document is  

placed before the Court, the claims of Railways. Universities  

and Services and the other cricket Associations, who are of the  

view that concept of ‘one State one vote’ should not be  

applicable keeping in view their contribution to the game of  

cricket, shall be considered. The suggestions, shall be given  

within three weeks hence. For the purpose of drafting out the  

constitution after taking note of the suggestions, to make it final  

for the purpose of approval by this Court, the Office Bearers of  

B.C.C.I shall not hold a General Body Meeting.”                                                       

(Emphasis supplied)  

3 On 27 October 2017, the CoA filed a draft constitution for BCCI and its  

office bearers. Suggestions to the draft received from state cricket associations  

and other parties were filed by the CoA together with comments on the proposed  

suggestions, in a status report dated 12 January 2018. On 1 May 2018, this  

Court noted that suggestions to the draft constitution have been filed and would  

be finalized by the Court. In the interest of fairness, it was however observed  

that any further suggestions that a state cricket association may have, could still  

be forwarded to the amicus. Accordingly, the following directions were issued :  

“A draft Constitution meant for the B.C.C.I. and its Office  

Bearers has been filed on 27.10.2017. Suggestions to the  

same by various State Cricket Associations have also been  

filed and the same have been attached to the draft  

Constitution. The draft Constitution shall be finalized by  

this Court.  

In the meantime, if any State Cricket Association intends  

to file any further suggestion, they may submit the same  

in bullet points to Mr. Gopal Subramanium, learned  

Amicus Curiae, who shall compile the suggestions and file  

it before this Court within three days.

6    

It is hereby made clear that the draft Constitution approved  

by this Court shall not be debated upon and shall stand  

finalized, only subject to the determination made in the  

application(s) for recall of the primary judgment, pending  

adjudication before this Court.  

Let the matter be listed on 11.5.2018.”    (Emphasis supplied)  

4 Following this comprehensive exercise which has been taken by the CoA,  

the amicus and by all the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of diverse  

parties, including state cricket associations and those who have served as office  

bearers of BCCI, the suggestions made by all stakeholders have been compiled  

and presented to the Court. The amicus has, in the course of compiling the  

suggestions, informed the Court that as many as nineteen state cricket  

associations, the Association of Indian Universities, the Cricket Club of India and  

National Cricket Club, the Administrator appointed by the Delhi High Court for  

DDCA and two officer bearers of BCCI (Mr Amitabh Choudhary, Secretary and  

Mr Anirudh Chaudhary, Treasurer) have submitted suggestions. We have heard  

all the stakeholders who wished to be heard at length so as to enable the Court  

to form a holistic perspective. The purpose of this exercise is to finalise the text  

of BCCI’s Constitution which incorporates the principles which find acceptance  

by the Lodha Committee (and affirmed by this Court), while at the same time  

ensuring a measure of practicality in implementation. The acrimony which  

witnessed the proceedings earlier has given way to a robust cooperation by the  

counsel appearing for all the stakeholders. Before we deal with the suggestions,  

we must commend the approach adopted by all the stakeholders before this  

Court. All the learned Counsel who advanced submissions made a fair attempt

7    

to resolve the outstanding issue of finalizing the draft constitution, with a sense  

of objectivity. It was after hearing extensive arguments of all the learned Counsel  

that on 5 July 2018, this Court reserved orders on the question of finalizing the  

draft constitution having due regard to the contents of the draft placed on the  

record and the suggestions of the learned amicus Curiae and counsel.  

5 Broadly speaking, the suggestions which have been received to the draft  

constitution have been divided by Mr Gopal Subramanium,  learned amicus  

Curiae under the following heads :    

                 a) Issues relating to membership and Associate Membership;  

a) Number of members in Selection Committee and related  

matters;  

b) Cooling off period;  

c) Disqualifications;  

d) Constitution of the Apex council;  

e) Conditions imposed on State Associations;  

f) Power/Duties of Office Bearers and Professional  

Management (CEO);  

g) No interference at all in the functioning of BCCI; and  

h) Binding value of Frequently Asked Questions issued by the  

Hon’ble Justice Lodha committee.  

We propose to examine the issues which have been raised during the course of  

hearing.  

8    

A. Issues relating to membership and Associate Membership: One  State – One Vote  

 6 Rule (3)(a)(i) of the draft constitution contemplates that membership of  

BCCI shall consist of (i) Full members and; (ii) Associate members. The text of  

the draft constitution provides thus :  

“(ii) Full Members  

A. Each State shall be represented by a state cricket  

association duly recognized by the BCCI and such  

associations shall be Full Members. No State shall have  

more than one Full Member at any given point of time.   

B. The associations who are the controlling bodies for  

cricket in the following States shall be the Full Members  

of the BCCI:  

1. Andhra Pradesh  

2. Arunachal Pradesh  

3. Assam  

4. Bihar  

5. Chhattisgarh  

6. Delhi  

7. Goa  

8. Gujarat  

9. Haryana  

10. Himachal Pradesh  

11. Jammu and Kashmir  

12. Jharkhand  

13. Karnataka  

14. Kerala  

15. Madhya Pradesh  

16. Maharashtra  

17. Manipur  

18. Meghalaya  

19. Mizoram  

20. Nagaland  

21. Orissa  

22. Punjab  

23. Rajasthan  

24. Sikkim  

25. Tamil Nadu  

26. Telangana  

27. Tripura  

28. Uttar Pradesh

9    

29. Uttarakhand  

30. West Bengal  

C. In States with multiple Existing Members, the full  

membership shall rotate annually among such Existing  

Members such that only one of them will exercise the  

rights and privileges of a Full Member at any given point  

of time. The rotation shall be as per the policy framed by  

the BCCI.  

D. Where disputes are pending regarding the duly  

recognized association to represent a particular State,  

the State shall be represented by the recognized  

association, subject to any order of the Court or  

resolution of the BCCI as the case may be.  

(iii)  Associate Members  

A. Any Existing Member (including an Existing Member  

who is not exercising the rights and priileges of a Full  

Member in terms of Rule 3(1)(ii)C above)  shall be an  

Associate Member of the BCCI.  

B. The BCCI may induct any other entity as an Associate  

Member, subject to all the conditions and  

disqualifications laid down in Rule 33(b)(b) below.”  

7 In Chapter 1 of its report titled “The Structure and Constitution”, the  

Lodha Committee dealt with membership of BCCI and anomalies perceived in  

its composition. The Committee took note of the fact that several states such as  

Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Uttarakhand, the six north-eastern states (except Tripura)  

and Union Territories (except Delhi) lack representation on the Board. On the  

other hand, the Committee perceived an anomaly in that states like Maharashtra  

and Gujarat hold three full memberships each. The Committee noted that the  

Services Sports Control Board (“Services”), Railway Sports Promotion Board  

(“Railways”) and Association of Indian Universities (“Universities”) do not as  

such represent any specified territory but are actively involved in the game of

10    

cricket whereas some members like the National Cricket Club at Kolkata and  

the Cricket Club of India at Mumbai do not represent any territory. The Lodha  

Committee relied upon territoriality as a determining factor for the grant of full  

membership. Railways, Services and Universities not being tied to the territory  

of one state were denied full membership.  Though Gujarat fielded three cricket  

teams (Gujarat, Saurashtra and Baroda) and so did Maharashtra (Mumbai,  

Maharashtra and Vidarbha) both states would each have one Full membership.  

The Lodha Committee recommended that the status of associate member  

should be granted to those members who do not represent any territory.  

8 In the principal judgment of this Court dated 18 July 2016, the one state -  

one vote norm was accepted. While doing so this Court observed thus :  

“62. That brings us to the question whether “One State One  

vote” recommended by the Committee suffers from any  

legal or other infirmity sufficient for this Court to reject the  

same. The recommendation made by the Committee has a  

two-fold impact on the current state of affairs in BCCI. The first  

is the reduction of some of the Associations and Clubs from the  

full membership of BCCI to the status of Associate Members.  

The other aspect of the recommendation is the reduction of the  

full membership of at least four existing full members to the  

status of associate members from the states of Maharashtra  

and Gujarat.  

63…We see no merit in that contention nor do we see any  

reason to disagree with the recommendation made by the  

committee, who has upon a thorough consideration of all facts  

and circumstances relevant to the working of the BCCI,  

recommended the conversion of the clubs and associations  

without a territory from full members to associate members.  

This is a measure which has been recommended with a  

view to structurally streamlining the BCCI to make it more  

responsive and accountable having regard to the  

aspiration of different regions for an equal opportunity to  

participate in the growth and promotion of the game in the  

country.

11    

65…a balance has to be struck with historical reality and the  

need for adopting a pragmatic, uniform and principled  

approach aimed at reforming and rationalizing BCCI’s  

structural edifice. The recommendation made by the  

Committee to the extent it provides for one vote for each state  

is unexceptionable nor should there be any compromise with  

what is proposed as a reformative measure. Even so the  

question is whether BCCI, in the peculiar situation prevalent in  

these two states, is in a position to recognize one of the three  

Associations representing different territories in those two  

States as the one that would represent the entire State.....That  

being so, the only reasonable and rational answer to the  

problem within the broad principle of One State One Vote  

would be to allow the full membership of BCCI to rotate  

among the three clubs on an annual basis.”                                             

(Emphasis supplied)  

9 The one state – one vote norm and the principle of territoriality have given  

rise to specific objections. Historically in the State of Maharashtra, there have  

been three associations, each of which fields its own cricket team in the Ranji  

Trophy : (i) Maharashtra; (ii) Mumbai and; (iii) Vidarbha. Similarly, in the State  

of Gujarat, there have been three associations representing: (i) Gujarat; (ii)  

Baroda; and (iii) Saurashtra. In both the states, these associations have made  

a signal contribution to the cricketing history of the nation. Besides, fielding  

teams for the Ranji Trophy, these associations have produced players of  

national and international repute. The amicus has responded to the plea before  

this Court for allowing full membership to the three associations each in the  

States of Maharashtra and Gujarat. The amicus submits that the order of this  

Court mandates that there should be an annual rotation of the constituent  

members of Maharashtra and Gujarat so that every year, one of the three  

constituent members would be capable of voting and participating in the general  

body. Moreover, it has been submitted that for the elections to the Apex Council

12    

which take place once every three years, the first member association which  

has already cast a vote should not be able to cast a vote at the end of three  

years but must pass it on to the next association in turn. In this manner, it has  

been suggested that all the three constituent associates of the two states will  

have due opportunity to not only participate in the affairs of the general body but  

would have an opportunity to vote at the end of three years. In the view of the  

amicus, a rotational policy is eminently practicable for Maharashtra and Gujarat  

and the mandate of the principal judgment brings about parity and fairness so  

that no constituent member is excluded from the general body for a period  

exceeding one year. However, it has not been explained how, once full  

membership has been granted, what legal principle can be applied for adopting  

a rotational policy. The amicus while recognising the circumstances of history  

pertaining to Maharashtra and Gujarat submits that the recommendations of the  

Lodha Committee which have been accepted in the principal judgment seek to  

bring about uniformity in the structure of management and a certain amount of  

domestic equality. However, he suggests that the releasing of grants and such  

other requirements as may be necessary for constituents must be suitably  

addressed by the CoA and by the regularly elected Apex Council.  

 10 We are of the view that it is necessary to restore full membership in the  

constitution of the BCCI to the three associations each in the State of  

Maharashtra (Maharashtra, Mumbai and Vidarbha) and in Gujarat (Gujarat,  

Baroda and Saurashtra). During the course of the hearing, written submissions

13    

have been placed on the record in which the contributions of Baroda,  

Saurashtra, Mumbai and Vidarbha have been set out. We need to extract them  

here:  

“BARODA CRICKET ASSOCIATION  

Cricket was introduced to Vadodara city by the Maharaja of  

Baroda, Sayajirao Gaekwad in 1934 and Moti Bagh Stadium  

was the home of Baroda cricket. Since then Baroda has  

emerged 5 times as Ranji Trophy Champrions in the year  

1942-43, 1946-47, 1949-50, 1957-58 & 2000-01.  

Baroda had produced many famous cricketers of international  

level in the past such as Vijay Hazare, Gogumal Kishenchand,  

Jayasinghrao Ghorpade, Deepak Shodhan and in the present  

generation Datta Gaekwad, Chandu Borde, Kiran More,  

Anshuman Gaekwad … Jitendra Patel. Amongst the later crop,  

Irfan Pathan, Yusuf Pathan, Zaheer Khan and Munaf Patel  

have played for this association.”  

“MUMBAI CRICKET ASSOCIATION  

In the year 1928, ‘the Bombay Presidency (Proper) Cricket  

Association’ was formed having geographical limits extending  

from Sind in the north to Karnataka (excluding Mysore State)  

in the South. In the year 1935 it was re-christened as ‘Bombay  

Cricket Association’ as the newly formed Gujarat and  

Maharashtra Cricket Association receded from the territorial  

limits of the Bombay Presidency (Proper) Cricket Association.  

The present day Mumbai Cricket Association or MCA is the  

governing body for cricket in Mumbai and its surrounding  

regions like Thane and Navi Mumbai. The Mumbai cricket team  

is the team for The Mumbai Cricket Association in the Ranji  

Trophy. The team has won over 41 titles, the most recent being  

in 2015-16. It has also come runner-up in the final of the Ranji  

Trophy a total of 4 times. The association owns the Wankhede  

Stadium.  

Famous cricketers produced by MCA, amongst others, include  

Abey Kuruvilla, Ajinkya Rahane, Ajit Wadekar, Ashok Mankad,  

Chandu Borde, Dilip Sardesai, Dilip Vengsarkar, Eknath  

Solkar, Farokh Engineer, Jatin Paranjpe, Polly Umrigar, Ravi  

Shastri, Rohit Sharma, Rustomji Jamshedji, Rusi Modi, Sachin  

Tendulkar, Sandeep Patil, Sanjay Manjrekar, Sunil Gavaskar,  

Vijay Manjrekar, Vijay Merchant, Vinod Kambli, Wasim Jaffer  

etc.”  

14    

“SUARASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION  

Saurashtra is one of three cricket teams based in Gujarat  

which competes in the Ranji Trophy (the others being Baroda  

and Gujarat). Formerly it was known as Nawanagar Cricket  

Team. Nawanagar was an Indian princely state in the historical  

Halar region, located on the southern shores of the Gulf of  

Kutch. Ranjitsinhji often known as ‘Ranji’, was the ruler of the  

Indian princely state of Nawanagar from 1907 to 1933, as  

Maharaja Jam Saheb, and a noted Test cricketer who played  

for the English cricket team. He also played first-class cricket  

for Cambridge University, and county cricket for Sussex.  

Ranji has widely been regarded as one of the greatest batsmen  

of all time. In 1934 the BCCI launched a national competition  

between “the princes and the princely states” and it was named  

after the greatest Indian player of that time, KS Ranjitsinhji.  

Saurashtra won the Ranji Trophy in 1936-37 and were also  

runners up in the very next season of 1937-38. They have been  

runners up in Ranji Trophy (plate) in 1937-38, 2012-13 and  

2015-16.  

Famous International players are Cheteshwar Pujara,  

Ravindra Jadeja & Jaydev Unadkat.”  

“VIDARBHA CRICKET ASSOCIATION  

Vidarbha Cricket Association is the governing body of  cricket  

activities in the Vidarbha region in Maharashtra state and  

Vidarbha cricket team. Vidarbha first played first-class cricket  

in the 1957-58 season, competing against the other Central  

Zone teams until 2001-2002, after which the Ranji Trophy was  

no longer contested on a zonal basis. Vidarbha’s best seasons  

were 1970-71 and 1995-96, when it reached the quarter-finals  

of the Ranji Trophy and 2002-03 and 2011-12, when it reached  

the semi-finals of the Plate Group, Vidarbha has played more  

than 250 first-class matches.  

Umesh Yadav is a member of the Vidarbha Cricket Team.  

Vidarbha won the Ranji Trophy and Irani Trophy in the 2017-

2018 season.”  

These associations have a long and abiding history of nurturing talent for the  

game of cricket in India. The history of cricket in India is replete with their

15    

contribution to the cause of cricket. These associations have produced players  

who have brought laurels to their states and to the nation. The principle of  

territoriality requires that each of the States and Union Territories should have  

full membership of BCCI in terms as suggested in clause 3(a)(ii-B). This  

becomes a principle of inclusion. To utilise territoriality as a basis of exclusion is  

problematic because it ignores history and the contributions made by the above  

associations to the development of cricket and its popularity. Having due regard  

to the contributions made by Mumbai and Vidarbha in the State of Maharashtra  

and by Baroda and Saurashtra in the State of Gujarat to the game of cricket, it  

would be appropriate to also grant them full membership of the BCCI. We  

however, maintain the decision not to grant the status of full members to the  

National Cricket Club and the Cricket Club of India. Neither of the two Clubs  

fields teams in the Ranji Trophy. They cannot be placed at par with the other  

state associations.    

Railways  

11 The contribution of Railways to the cause of Indian Cricket is noteworthy.  

It has been pointed out before the Court that :  

“RAILWAYS SPORTS PROMOTION BOARD  

Railways Sports Promotion Board (RSPB) is a sports board run  

by the Indian Railways. It promotes 29 sporting disciplines and  

owns the Karnail Singh Stadium in New Delhi.  

RSPB is a member of the Board of Control for Cricket in India  

and RSPB fields the Railways’ cricket team in domestic cricket  

competitions in India such as the Ranji Trophy. In recent years  

since 2000, Railways have won the trophy twice and become  

runners-up as well. As Champions of the Ranji Trophy, they

16    

have played the Irani Trophy twice, emerging victorious on  

both occasions.  

Famous International Cricketers include Mahendra Singh  

Dhoni (played for South Eastern Railways & was employed as  

a Train Ticket Examiner), Murli Kartik, Sanjay Bangar, Karn  

Sharma. In the recently concluded ICC Women’s World Cup  

2017, the Indian Women’s Team reached the finals of the  

tournament where 10 out of the 15 women cricketers playing  

for India are employees of the Indian Railways. In fact Diana  

Fram Edulji (one of the members of the COA) has also  

represented the Railways.”      

12 In suggesting the grant of full membership to the Railways, the amicus  

has made certain pertinent comments which are reproduced below :  

“Railways fields at least 90% of the members of the Women’s  

Cricket Team, i.e. who play for India in the national team. A  

question therefore arises whether Railways must be given a  

full membership. In view of the security of employment of the  

players from Railways as well as the ability to demonstrate  

playing skills and having regard to women’s cricket as an  

integral part of Indian Cricket, it appears necessary to consider  

this as an exception. It is only on these considerations that it is  

possible to recommend Railways to a full membership. The  

Amicus is of the opinion that this qualifies to be considered as  

an exception.”  

 13 The amendment proposed to the draft constitution is in the following  

terms :  

“E. Notwithstanding anything contained hereinabove in this  

Rule 3(a)(ii), a representative from the Indian Railways shall be  

entitled to vote at meetings of the General Body of the BCCI.  

However, such representative shall be a former cricketer from  

the Indian Railways who is elected by an association of former  

players from the Indian Railways and not a person nominated  

by the Government/Railway Sports Promotion Board.”  

14 We accept the amendment proposed by the amicus. We clarify  

specifically that the representative from Railways who would exercise voting

17    

power must be a former cricketer who has represented Indian Railways and who  

is elected by an association of former players from the Indian Railways and not  

a person nominated by the government or the Railway Sports Promotion Board.  

Services and Association of Indian Universities  

   15 The amicus has not suggested the grant of full membership to Services  

and the Association of Indian Universities. For Services, he submits that  

sufficient material is not available and that having regard to the need for  

insulation from government control, ‘as at present advised’, it is not possible to  

recommend the grant of a full membership status. As regards the Association  

of Indian Universities, it has been submitted that since they do not field a team  

for the Ranji Trophy, full membership status should not be granted.  

On the contribution by the Services team to the cause of Indian cricket, we take  

note of the following :  

“SERVICE SPORTS CONTROL BOARD  

The aim of the Service Sports Control (SSCB) is to conduct  

inter-services sports championships to select and to train  

services sports persons. The board initially was known as the  

Army Sports Control Board and was established in 1919. Post-

independence, it was rechristened as Service Sports Control  

Board and all the three services are running the organization  

on a rotational basis. The Services cricket team plays in the  

Ranji Trophy, the premier domestic first-class cricket  

competition in India. Under the auspices of the SSCB, the  

players represent the Indian armed services.  

They first played in the Ranji Trophy in 1949-50. They have  

played about 320 matches in the Ranji Trophy.”  

  Similarly as regards the Association of Indian Universities, we may note that :    

“ALL INDIA UNIVERSITIES

18    

Many Indian Universities players went on to play Test cricket.  

From the first side in 1949-50, for example, Nana Joshi, Pankaj  

Roy, Polly Umrigar, Gulabrai Ramchand, Deepak Shodhan  

and Subhash Gupte played Tests for India. Three of the 1970-

71 side Ashok Gandotra, Mohinder  Amarnath and Budhi  

Kunderan played Test cricket. Thereafter Sunil Gavaskar,  

Kenia Jayantilal, Surinder Amarnath and Dilip Doshi also  

played Test cricket.”     

16 The Services team represents the Armed Forces of the nation. The  

Services have a long history of association with Indian sports in general and  

with cricket as well. Having regard to the pre-eminent position occupied by the  

Services including the Army, Navy and Air Force in propagating the cause of  

sports and cricket, we are of the view that the same principle which we have  

followed in the case of Railways should be followed in their case. Similarly, the  

Universities are a nucleus for encouraging the game of cricket among players  

of the college going generation in the country. We would therefore also grant full  

membership to the Association of Indian Universities. The amendment which  

has been proposed to the draft constitution by the amicus in the case of the  

Railways shall be suitably modified to also cover the Services and the  

Association of Indian Universities. The representative respectively for Services  

and the Association of Indian Universities shall be a former cricketer who has  

played for them respectively and is elected by an association of former players  

and not a person nominated by the government/ sports control board.   

19    

B. Number of Selectors  

    17 The Lodha Committee restricted the number of selectors to three. While  

doing so, it opined that with the constitution of a Cricket Talent Committee, a  

three-member selection committee will be more compact, increase the authority  

of the Selection Committee and make it accountable for team performance.  

18 The Selection Committee is entrusted with the responsibility of selecting  

cricket teams for participation at various levels. For the men’s teams, there are  

two committees which look after the selection of teams for tournaments in  

various formats of the game. These are:  

“ I All India Senior Selection Committee:  

International matches – Test Matches, ODI Matches  

and T20 matches  

India ‘A’ teams – both for home and away series  

President’s XI / BCCI XI to play visiting international  

teams  

II All India Junior Selection Committee:  

Under-23 cricket  

Under-19 cricket  

Under-16 cricket”  

   19 With twenty-eight teams, India is reported to have the highest number of  

first class teams in the world. Senior selectors watch over several tournaments

20    

during the course of the domestic cricketing season, from August to April every  

year. These are :  

“1.  Ranji Trophy league matches  

2.  Ranji Trophy knock out matches  

3.  Vijay Hazare League matches  

4.  Vijay Hazare knock out matches  

5.  Mustaq Ali league matches  

6.  Mustaq Ali Knock out matches  

7.  Irani Trophy  

8.  Duleep Trophy  

9.  Deodhar Trophy.”  

20 Apart from domestic cricket, senior selectors also witness India-A team  

matches and matches across different formats at home and overseas. National  

teams are required to be selected across different formats in accordance with  

the ICC schedule. Senior selectors are also part of the team management that  

selects the ‘playing eleven’ of the Indian team on the day prior to a match. On  

an average, it has been stated, a senior selector travels for nearly 280 days in  

a year, with a break during the IPL. Having regard to the vastness of the country  

and the need to effectively select from a wide pool of talent, it has been  

submitted that restricting the Selection Committee to three persons is not in the  

interest of the game and that a five-member selection team would be necessary.  

Another aspect which has been highlighted is that generally, a fifteen-member  

squad is chosen to represent India at the international level in Test matches,

21    

ODIs and T20 matches. About 40 per cent of the players participate in all the  

formats. Many cricketers who have had the best of records in domestic cricket  

are unable to represent the country in international matches. It has been  

submitted before the Court that it is necessary to motivate cricketers at the  

domestic level. Hence, cricketers who have not represented India in  

international matches should not be excluded altogether from being part of the  

Selection Committee.  

21 We have been persuaded with the reasons which have been adduced  

before the Court for enhancing the number of selectors on the Selection  

Committee from three to five. Restricting the number of selectors to three was  

recommended by the Lodha Committee with the specific purpose of ensuring  

compactness of size, authority of decision making and monitoring performance.  

While bearing these factors in   consideration, it is necessary to ensure that the  

purpose of a broad-based Selection Committee which facilitates a careful  

evaluation of the talent pool across the country is achieved. The vast territory of  

the nation, the extent of cricket being played both at the national and  

international level, the need for selectors to travel extensively to spot talent from  

the pool of cricketers and the need to encourage both domestic and international  

cricket, are consideration which persuade us to accept the plea for modification  

in regard to the number of selectors to five.  

22    

22 We may note that the amicus has also supported the suggestion that the  

number of selectors be increased to five. He however also indicated that this  

should be subject to the criteria of a selector having played a minimum of (a)  

seven test matches; or (b) thirty first class matches; or (c) ten One Day  

Internationals in the fifty over format and a minimum of twenty first class  

matches. We accordingly accept the proposed amendment as suggested by the  

amicus in the following terms :  

“Clause 26(2)A(i)  

“The Men’s Selection Committee shall select the Senior  

National Team for representation in Tests, One Day  

Internationals. T20 and any other format. This Committee shall  

also be responsible for providing evaluation reports of the  

respective team performances to the Apex Council on a  

quarterly basis.”  

“Clause 26(2)A(ii)  

The Men’s Selection Committee shall consist of five persons  

to be appointed by a Cricket Advisory Committee comprising  

of reputed former international cricketers identified by the  

BCCI at the annual General Meeting, subject to the following  

criteria:  

(a) Every member of the Men’s Selection Committee   

should have played a minimum of  

(i) Seven Test Matches; or  

(ii) Thirty First class Matches; or    

           (iii) Ten One Day International Matches and   

twenty First Class Matches.  

(b) Every member of the Men’s Selection Committee  

should have retired from the game at  least five years  

previously.  

The senior most among the members of the Men’s Selection  

Committee shall be appointed as the Chairperson.”  

 “Clause 26 (2) B (i)  

23    

The Junior Cricket Committee shall consist  of five persons to  

be appointed by the BCCI at the Annual General Meeting, on  

such terms and conditions as may be decided by the Apex  

Council from time to time. Only former players who have played  

a minimum of 25 First Class games shall be eligible to be  

appointed to this Committee, provided that they have retired  

from the game at least five years previously. The senior most  

amongst the members of the Committee shall be appointed as  

the Chairperson.”    

“Clause 26 (2) C (ii)  

The Women’s Selection Committee  shall consist of five  

persons to be appointed by the BCCI at the Annual General  

Meeting, on such terms and conditions as may be decided by  

the Apex council from time to time. Only former players who  

have represented the Women’s National Team shall be eligible  

to be appointed to this Committee, provided that they have  

retired from the game at least five years previously. The senior  

most international amongst the members of the Committee  

shall be appointed as the Chairperson.”  

23 Until the elections to the BCCI take place, the CoA is empowered to  

consult with the Cricket Advisory Committee, comprising of reputed former  

international cricketers and to constitute a Committee of Selectors consistent  

with the above criteria. In regard to the appointment of coaches, managers,  

physiotherapists and other staff, we accept the modification suggested in clause  

24(5) in the following terms :  

“Clause 24 (5)  

To appoint Team Officials for the Indian teams which shall  

compulsorily include qualified coaches, managers,  

physiotherapists, nutritionists, trainers, analysts, counsellors  

and medics. However, the Head Coach of each of the National  

Teams shall be appointed by the Cricket Advisory Committee  

referred to in Rule 26(2)A(ii) below.”  

24    

C. Cooling Off Period   

24 The Lodha Committee recommended that   

(i)  the tenure of each term for office bearers of the BCCI and state     

associations should be three years;   

(ii)   a maximum of three terms should be allowed regardless of the post  

held; and   

(iii)    there should be a mandatory ‘cooling off period’ after each term.   

In making these recommendations, the Committee has been guided by the need  

to ensure that vested interests do not emerge out of the indefinite continuation  

in office of one or more individuals. These recommendations seek to enforce a  

rule against self-perpetuation by stipulating the period of each term of office, the  

number of terms which a single individual may hold and the requirement of a  

break between successive terms. The recommendations can be construed as  

an effort to ensure a dispersal of authority so that control over BCCI and the  

state associations is not concentrated in the hands of one or a limited group of  

persons. The proposals for setting limits on tenures and terms were  

incorporated in a section which the Committee describes as the “end of the  

innings”.  

25    

25 In the principal judgment of this Court, the recommendations of the Lodha  

Committee have been accepted for the following reasons:   

“20…These recommendations come in the wake of a finding  

by the Committee that under the present dispensation office  

bearers could continue for any number of terms. The  

Committee found both of these to be unacceptable and in our  

opinion rightly so.... Given the problems that often arise on  

account of the individuals holding the office for any number of  

consecutive terms, the Committee was, in our opinion, justified  

in recommending the length of a term in office ...  The three  

years recommended by the Committee is, in our opinion,  

reasonable. Similarly, the prescription of cooling off period  

between two terms cannot be faulted .... Similarly, an optimum  

period of 9 years as a member of the Apex Council cannot be  

termed as unreasonable.....”  (Emphasis supplied).  

26 The recommendations of the Lodha Committee, as adopted by this Court,  

have been clarified in two orders dated 20 January 2017 and 24 March 2017.  

The clarification by this Court is that when an office bearer who completes nine  

years in any post in the BCCI is disqualified to become an office bearer of the  

BCCI again. A similar disqualification attaches to a person who has held any  

post of an office bearer, in a state association for nine years. For the sake of  

clarity, what is indicated in the order dated 24 March 2017 reads thus :   

“21…What has been meant by the clarificatory order is that, if  

an office bearer has completed nine years in any post in the  

B.C.C.I., he shall stand disqualified to become an office bearer  

of the B.C.C.I. 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. 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 B.C.C.I.”        

(Emphasis supplied)

26    

27 A considerable amount of fire has been directed against the provision for  

a cooling off period. Essentially, the cooling off period stipulates that an office  

bearer is not eligible to contest a succeeding election. The recommendation has  

been criticised on the ground that an individual who has acquired experience in  

working in a particular post for three years is unable to utilise the experience  

gained (as a result of a cooling off period of three years) which would be a loss  

to the game of cricket. “Continuity of service”, it has been submitted, subserves  

the interest of the game and a person who has “enriched himself” over a period  

of three years should be allowed to contribute even thereafter without a break.  

This, it has been submitted, would enable office bearers to develop their  

networks with other cricketing nations and the ICC. Moreover, since an upper  

age limit of seventy years is in place, it has been submitted that the requirement  

of a cooling off period may be dispensed with. The nature of cricket, it has been  

urged, is rapidly evolving and an endeavour must be made to ensure that  

individuals with requisite experience are able to contribute to the game.   

28 While dealing with the objections to a cooling off period, it is necessary at  

the outset to emphasise that the term of an office bearer cannot be regarded  

either as an opportunity “to enrich himself” or as a matter involving “continuity of  

service”. The expression “enriched himself” may have a legitimate connotation  

if it adverts only to experience gained. Otherwise, enrichment in the form of  

personal aggrandisement is precisely what was frowned upon by the Lodha  

Committee, and for justifiable reasons. The position of an office bearer in the

27    

state associations and in the BCCI is not a matter of ‘service’ in the conventional  

sense. Office bearers should not construe their position as employees with a  

vested right to a particular tenure of service. Undoubtedly, the submission that  

individuals must continue for a period which enables them to develop  

experience in the administration of the game cannot be discounted. Equally, it  

is a matter of concern that vested interests and conflicts of interest develop  

around power centres which have unbridled authority. Dispersal of authority is  

a necessary safeguard to ensure against the perpetuation of power centres.  

Individuals who administer the game of cricket must realise that the game is  

perched far above their personal interests. Important as experience in  

administration is, it is far-fetched to assume – and far more difficult for the court  

to accept – that experience rests on the shoulders of a closed group of a few  

individuals. In fact, opportunities to a wide body of talent encourage a dispersal  

of experience and democratisation of authority.        

29 Understood from the above perspective, the requirements that the term  

of office of an office bearer should be three years; and that an individual should  

not hold office in the BCCI for a period excess of nine years (regardless of the  

post held) with a similar stipulation of nine years for the state associations is  

manifestly in public interest. Both the stipulations are valuable safeguards to  

ensure against the concentration of power.   

28    

30 The requirement of a cooling off period of three years at the end of every  

term in office, however, requires careful consideration. The argument against  

the imposition of such a requirement is that by requiring an office bearer who  

has held a post for three years to undergo a break of three years prevents office  

bearers from applying their knowledge and experience in regard to the  

administration of the game of cricket. The submission which has urged before  

the Court is that once there is a cap of a nine year tenure for BCCI, with a similar  

tenure of nine years for the state associations, an additional cooling off period  

of three years at the end of every term of office may not be necessary.   

31 The amicus has earnestly supported the cooling off requirement as being  

necessary, having regard to the spirit of the Lodha Committee  

recommendations. A cooling off period, it has been urged is necessary to ensure  

that after a period of three years, a person is not able to migrate to another  

association and occupy the position of an office bearer or to occupy any other  

position in the same association. The amicus also submits that the expression  

‘office bearer’ should not be allowed to be circumvented by being a member of  

any other committee. Subject to these safeguards, the amicus agrees that a  

person may be able to serve for a period of nine years in the BCCI and nine  

years in a state association.   

29    

32 Having carefully evaluated the submissions which have been urged  

before us, we are of the view that a cooling off period should be observed. A  

cooling off period has several features which are of utmost importance : (i) it is  

a safeguard against the development of vested personal interests; (ii) it ensures  

against the concentration of power in a few hands; (iii) it facilitates a dispersal  

of authority; and (iv) it encourages the generation of a wider body of experienced  

administrators. Cooling off must be accepted as a means to prevent a few  

individuals from regarding the administration of cricket as a personal turf. The  

game will be better off without cricketing oligopolies.   

33 However, in our view, it would be appropriate to direct that a cooling off  

period of three years would apply after an individual holds two successive terms  

in office either in the BCCI, or in any state association or a combination of the  

two. For instance, if an office bearer has held office for two consecutive terms  

in any post in a state association, such an individual must face a cooling off  

period of three years. Likewise, if an individual has held any post as an office  

bearer of the BCCI for a total period of six years in succession, the individual  

must have a cooling off period of three years before seeking election again  

either to the BCCI or to a state association. The cooling off period would apply  

also in a situation where an individual holds a post for one term in a state  

association followed by a post in the BCCI successively or vice versa. This  

would ensure that after a period of six years involving two consecutive terms, a  

cooling off period would be attracted. Allowing an individual to act as an office

30    

bearer for six years in continuation, is a sufficiently long period for experience  

and knowledge gained to be deployed in the interest of the game without at the  

same time resulting in a monopoly of power.  

The cooling off period shall read as follows :    

“An office bearer who has held any post for two consecutive  

terms either in a state association or in the BCCI (or a  

combination of both) shall not be eligible to contest any further  

election without completing a cooling off period of three years.  

During the cooling off period, such an office bearer shall not be  

a member of the governing council or of any committee  

whatsoever of the BCCI or of a state association.”     

The above principle shall govern Clause 6(4) as well as Clause 14(4) of the draft  

constitution. The above principle will ensure that the cooling off period will come  

into operation upon a person holding any post for two consecutive terms not  

exceeding six years.   

34 We accordingly clarify that the position as approved by the Court in the  

present order shall be to the following effect:    

(i)    The term for all posts of office bearers in BCCI and in state associations  

shall be three years;  

(ii) No person shall hold the position of an office bearer in any state  

association, regardless of post, for a period in excess of nine years in the  

aggregate;  

31    

(iii) No person shall hold the post of office bearer in BCCI, regardless of post,  

for a period in excess of nine years in the aggregate;   

(iv) There shall be a cooling off period of three years after an individual has  

held the post of an office bearer for two consecutive terms either in a state  

association or in the BCCI or a combination of both; and                                   

(v) The expression ‘office bearer’ should not be permitted to be circumvented  

by being a member of any other committee or of the Governing Council  

in BCCI or any state association, as the case may be.  

D. Division of Functions, Professional Management and  

Disqualifications   

35 The report of the Lodha Committee postulates that the General body of  

the BCCI would consist of full members and associate members. The report  

provides for an Apex Council which is responsible for the administration of the  

Board.  

36 This functional distinction between the General body and the Apex  

Council is an institutional safeguard to ensure professional management of  

BCCI. The Apex Council is entrusted with the function of professional  

management through the Chief Executive Officer, the Chief Financial Officer  

and other officers who must be recruited on a transparent and professional  

basis. Of the nine members of the Apex Council, five (the President, Vice

32    

President, Secretary, Joint Secretary, Treasurer and a member) are to be  

elected by the General body.  

We approve clause 15 (1) in regard to the Apex Council which reads thus:    

“The affairs of BCCI shall be governed by the Apex Council  

and its framework of governance shall:  

(i) Enable strategic guidance of the entity;    (ii) Ensure efficient monitoring of management;    (iii) Ensure the performance of the respective roles,  

responsibilities and powers of the CEO, Managers, Cricket  Committees and Standing Committees except the  Governing Council; and  

 (iv) Ensure a distribution and balance of authority so that no  

single individual has unfettered powers.”    

E. Disqualifications   

37 In regard to disqualifications, we accept the clause in the draft constitution  

as proposed with the incidental modifications as suggested by the amicus. The  

disqualifications read as follows:   

“ Clause 6 (5)  

A person shall be disqualified from being an Office Bearer, a  

member of the Governing Council or any Committee or a  

representative to the International Cricket Council or any  

similar organization if he or she:  

(a) is not a citizen of India;    (b) has attained the age of 70 years;    (c) is declared to be insolvent, or of unsound mind;    (d) is a Minister or Government Servant or holds a public  

office;   

33    

(e) holds any office or post in a sports or athletic association  or federation apart from cricket;  

 (f) has been an Office Bearer of the BCCI for a cumulative  

period of 9 years or of a State  association for a  cumulative period of 9 years;  

 (g) has been charged by a Court of Law for having committed  

any criminal offence. i.e. an  order framing charges  has been passed by a court of law having competent  jurisdiction.”  

38 Clauses 29, 33(1), 33(2) and 45 of the draft constitution with the  

modifications suggested by the amicus read as follows :   

“Clause 29  

INADVERTENT OMISSION TO GIVE NOTICE OF MEETING   

Inadvertent omission to give notice of an Annual General or  

Special General Meeting or Meetings of the Apex Council or of  

any of the Committees to any member entitled thereto or the  

non-receipt thereof by such individual shall not invalidate the  

proceedings of such meetings.  

Clause 33(1)   

At least four weeks prior to the Annual General Meeting at  

which an election is to be held, the Apex Council shall appoint  

an Electoral Officer, who shall be a former member of the  

Election Commission of India.  

Clause 33 (2)  

The Electoral Officer shall oversee and supervise the entire  

election process including scrutiny of the electoral rolls for  

Councillors and the Players’ Cricket Association, which shall  

include all nominations and candidatures being subject to his  

scrutiny in accordance with the Rules.  

Clause 45  

These Rules and Regulations of the BCCI shall not be  

repealed, added to, amended or altered except when passed  

and adopted by a 3/4th majority of the members present and  

entitled to vote at a Special General Meeting of the General  

Body convened for the purpose or at the Annual General  

Meeting. Any such amendment will not be given effect to  

without the leave of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.”      

34    

39 We approve the above clauses. We are emphatically of the view that once  

the draft constitution has been approved by this Court, any amendment should  

not be given effect to without the leave of this Court.   

40 Having regard to the fact that the draft constitution submitted by the CoA  

on 27 October 2017 has now been approved by this Court subject to the  

aforesaid modifications, we issue the following directions:  

1 The Registrar of Societies under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration  

Act, 1975 shall upon the presentation of the said Constitution by the CEO,  

register the documents forthwith and report compliance by way of a report  

to the Secretary General of this Court within four weeks;  

2 Upon the registration of the said Constitution of BCCI, each of the  

members shall undertake registration of their respective Constitutions on  

similar lines within a period of 30 days thereafter. A compliance certificate  

must be furnished to the CoA, which shall file a status report before this  

Court with reference to the compliance undertaken by the State  

Associations; and  

3 In the event that any State Association does not undertake compliance  

with the abovesaid directions, the directions contained in the orders of this  

Court dated 7 October 2016 and 21 October 2016 shall revive.  

35    

41 The Committee of Administrators is at liberty to submit a further report for  

such future directions as may be warranted and to secure compliance.  

    ………....................................CJI                                                               [DIPAK MISRA]            

 …….…......................................J           [A.M. KHANWILKAR]          ……..….......................................J      [Dr D Y  CHANDRACHUD]                            

New Delhi;  August 09, 2018.