Lodha panel rejects BCCI’s request to delay scheduled meet
Justice RM Lodha (Image credit: www.sportstarlive.com)
Mumbai: Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) suffered another setback when Supreme Court monitored Lodha committee refused to grant extension to scheduled meet, which is supposed to happen Tuesday. The committee has given BCCI six months to implement the reforms in the wake of serious charges against the game in general.
The request came a day after BCCI’s newly appointed legal advisor Justice Markandey Katju told BCCI to file a review petition against apex court verdict to a bigger bench and not meet the committee, terming the recommended reforms “null and void”.
“Ajay Shirke (BCCI secretary) finally wrote to the Committee late last night requesting that the meeting on Tuesday with him and Anurag Thakur be deferred. The request has been declined,” a source close to panel told PTI on conditions of anonymity.
It is learnt that both Thakur and Shirke may face Contempt of Court if they don’t meet the panel tomorrow at proposed time of 11 am.
A senior BCCI official said that the move was a deliberate delaying tactics to buy some time to strategise for future course of action. BCCI want to get a stay order on the July 18th verdict passed by two-member bench comprising CJI TS Thakur and Justice FMI Khallifullah.
“The board could not have got a stay order before 11 am on Tuesday which is scheduled time for Thakur and Shirke to meet panel members. A delay would have enabled the BCCI lawyers to file for review petition and seek a stay on verdict. But after Justice Katju’s attack, we know that bridges have been burnt,” the senior official said.
Justice Katju who had prepared an interim report termed the SC verdict and appointment of Lodha panel as “unconstitutional and illegal”.
He also criticised apex court saying that it is not judiciary but legislature’s prerogative to make laws.
He said SC cannot “outsource” (Lodha panel) a body to give punishment to BCCI. BCCI has tough time ahead to explain its stance and could not be seen as disregarding the judgement, which is being monitored by the apex court of the country.