Unequal distribution millions of rupees among its members by the cash-rich Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) provoked the Supreme Court to slam it as a “mutual benefit society.” A bench of Chief Justice T S Thakur and Justice F M I Kalifulla found that BCCI had given £6 million each to Gujarat and Goa every year but gave nothing to Bihar for the last six years. Like Bihar, 10 other states did not receive any money from BCCI over the years.
“If 11out of 29 states get zero amount from the cricket board, that is surely not a good sign. You are giving £6 million to Gujarat and Goa but giving just Rs 5000,000 to affiliate members in north-eastern states? Why? You have not spent a penny on development of cricket in 11 states for the last several years,” the bench said after perusing the board's expenses and fund management details.
The hearing saw the bench rejecting BCCI's reservations about the recommendations of the Lodha committee, and suggesting that cricket administrators could be using fund allocation to buy support from member associations.
“The mandate of the board is to promote cricket all over India and not only in Mumbai and Gujarat. Cricketing talents are available not only in Mumbai but also in other parts of the country. You have done nothing to nurse and nourish the talent in smaller states as 11 states got zero contribution from you over the years. You have made a mutual benefit society. It is like you show me the face and I will determine how much you should get,” the court said. BCCI's counsel K K Venugopal had to call upon board official Ratnakar Shetty, who was the chief coordinator for the recently concluded World T20 championship and is also the COO for IPL.
Ratnakar Shetty explained that states which had a stadium and were capable of conducting international matches got a major chunk of the money earned by the board from sale of telecast rights. The board informed the court that henceforth, the accounts of BCCI members would be audited by three firms of international repute.
The court said this meant Maharashtra and Gujarat, both of which have three permanent members in the board, got £6 million every year while an affiliate member like Nagaland got Rs 5000,000 a year.
Interestingly, the court asked whether it was not a tactic to buy the support of a member during voting. “You have been releasing money and there has been no control or supervision on the manner in which the member spent it. You are basically corrupting that member to vote for you,” it said.
“There has to be some distributive justice in your allocation of funds. You must chalk out a plan how to upgrade the affiliates to permanent membership and pay them adequately to improve their infrastructure,” the bench said and referred to the Justice R M Lodha-headed panel's recommendation for one state-one vote norm in BCCI.
Venugopal and BCCI members protested loudly. Though the court agreed to hear in detail the objections to certain recommendations of the Lodha panel, it said, “This is not an ordinary committee. It is headed by a former CJI and had two retired SC judges as its members. They held extensive deliberations. Their conclusions appear credible to us.”