Rajasthan High Court extends stay on RCA polls, issues notice to government

JAIPUR: The Rajasthan High Court on Friday extended the stay on holding a fresh election to the Rajasthan Cricket Association (RCA) till further orders while issuing notice to RCA’s election officer Ram Lubhaya, principal secretary (sports of state government) and registrar cooperatives to file their replies within a week.
The single bench of Justice Mahendra Goyal adjourned the hearing on the matter on October 11 after RCA asked for more time during the hearing on Friday to file their written reply.
Meanwhile, the RCA has filed an appeal against the single bench order of stay on the election in the division bench which will come up for hearing on October 10.
The RCA election in which chief minister Ashok Gehlot’s son Vaibhav Gehlot was in the fray for the post of president was scheduled to be held on Friday. On Thursday, the court brushed aside the contentions of RCA and stayed the election on a petition filed by district cricket associations of Dausa, Nagaur, Sriganganagar and Alwar questioning the impartiality of the election officer.
It was alleged in the writ petition that the RCA election officer Lubhaya is a retired IAS officer enjoying the patronage of the government and a free and fair election is not possible under his supervision. They demanded election under the supervision of a retired Supreme Court judge.
The counsel appearing for the DCAs argued that Lubhaya was actively engaged with the state of government and was working under the chief minister whose son Vaibhav is not only outgoing president of RCA but is also contesting for the same post again.
It was alleged that in March this year, Lubhaya was appointed chairman of a high-powered committee for delimitation of the districts in Rajasthan for a period of six months and subsequently as an election officer on September 8 this month.
Later the state government extended his term in the committee up to 2023 only on September 13 to “influence” the elections of RCA. The petition alleged that the election officer is not a “fair and independent” person, as contemplated by the Supreme Court while approving Justice (retd) Lodha Committee report in 2016 in the matter of BCCI.