Amitabh Choudhary is the acting secretary of BCCI. (Source: File Photo)
The BCCI acting secretary Amitabh Choudhary has accused the Committee of Administrators (CoA) of “extinguishing all democratic processes” with regard to its directions to the proposed June 22 Special General Meeting (SGM). The CoA has directed the “BCCI employee/ consultant/ retainer/ service provider” not to “prepare and/or circulate any papers in respect of the said SGM”, taking exception to the fact that the SGM notice didn’t have the prior approval of the Committee. Choudhary, however, has criticised the CoA for ‘misinterpreting’ the Supreme Court orders in this regard and cited examples of the Committee’s overreach.
“At the outset, it would be pertinent to mention here that the directions and instructions issued by the Committee qua the convening of the Special General Meeting of the Board of Control for Cricket in India has the effect of extinguishing all democratic processes in the organisation and the same is being done by the Committee under the misplaced umbrella of the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court,” the acting secretary wrote in his email to the CoA on Friday.
He added that the BCCI has the (legal) advice in its favour in terms of holding the SGM, while mentioning that the members’ rights “are sought to be scuttled” by the CoA.
According to a BCCI official, the SGM can go ahead “100%” even in the absence of the Board employees/staff, who are supposed to take care of the logistics etc. part. The CoA, it is learnt, will not stall the SGM but there’s a veiled warning that the general body meeting would be “at risk and peril of the office-bearers”.
“The CoA email (on June 1) was sent only to protect the employees of the BCCI. They were very worried (about what to do; logistics etc.). So the CoA just issued an email, asking the employees not to act on any instructions from the office-bearers/members. They (employees) are under instructions from the CoA. Now they are protected. It is understood that the CoA will not take any steps to stall the SGM. The CoA feels that the SGM, if it goes ahead after the Committee’s email, will be at risk and peril of the office-bearers,” a source close to the Vinod Rai-headed Committee told The Indian Express.
Choudhary had earlier issued the June 22 SGM notice for the June 22 SGM, with 10 items on the agenda. The acting secretary adhered to the requisitions sent by about 20 BCCI members – minimum requirement 10 – who demanded issues like the Members’ Participation Agreement (MPA) with regard to the ICC events and player contracts to be discussed in the general body. The ICC’s decision to scrap the 2021 Champions Trophy, to be replaced with a World T20, hasn’t gone down well with a large section of the cricket board, while the new contract system that saw the introduction of an ‘A+’ category and a sharp pay rise, doesn’t have the general body’s approval yet. Under the new compensation structure announced by the CoA, five players in the top bracket now get Rs 7 crore each per annum, while annual retainer fee for Grade A, B and C have been increased to Rs 5 crore, Rs 3 crore and Rs 1 crore respectively. The members, on the other hand, demanded an SGM, citing Rule 17 (i) (c) of the Rules and Regulations of the BCCI.
And now the acting secretary has complained about the CoA’s ‘overreach’. “While there has been little effort to show for results during the last year and a half where the Hon’ble Supreme Court mandated reforms were concerned, every possible effort has and is being made by the Committee to stall the decision-making processes institutionalised under the Rules and Regulations of the BCCI and to focus on usurping all powers contained therein and reduce the organisation to a tool to wield as it deems fit. It is important to point out that the Committee has adopted an adversarial approach to both the implementation of the reforms and to the supervision of the administration of the BCCI with various shifts of goal-posts during this period,” Choudhary wrote in his email, citing previous examples like convening the selection committee meetings, the BCCI’s representation in the ICC and removal of the existing office-bearers to describe the CoA ‘overreach’.
He urged the CoA to withdraw its order. “In the facts and circumstances, arrogation of powers to itself and flawed interpretation of judicial orders it is humbly requested to kindly withdraw the orders which might come in the way of the constitutional functioning of the BCCI and may hamper the decision making of the General Body by restricting flow of information to the Board through the staff of the BCCI.”