The Supreme Court of India(SCI)has removed Anurag Thakuras president of the BCCI with a showcause notice issued in regards to charges of perjury and contempt of court.
Anurag Thakur has until January 19,2017 to reply to the Supreme Court's charges, as does Ajay Shirke, the BCCI secretary
To fill the gap created byAnurag Thakur and Ajay Shirke's removal, the SCI said the most senior vice-president of the BCCI would perform the duties of president in the interim, and the joint secretary - Amitabh Chaudhary - will perform the secretary's role.
The SCI also ordered that other office bearers of the BCCI and state associations who did not meet the eligibility criteria set by the Lodha Committee shall "cease to hold office" immediately. According to the committee's recommendations, an office bearer should be a citizen of India, should not be 70 years or older, should not be a government servant or minister, should not hold office in another sports organisation, should not have held office with the BCCI or state association for more than nine years, should not be insolvent or of unsound mind, and should not have a criminal record.
All existing office bearers who fulfilled the eligibility criteria were permitted to continue in their roles, but were asked to file an "unconditional undertaking" in the Supreme Court within four weeks from January 2 that they would implement the Lodha Committee's recommendations.
The Justice RM Lodha Committee's recommendations for a revamp of the BCCI were also taken into serious consideration, with the SC disqualifying all the board and its state association office bearers who have failed to meet the new norms set by the panel. The SC will replace the top brass of the BCCI with a new panel of administrators, also to be decided on January 19,2017
The bench, led by Chief Justice of India TS Thakur, had in the previous hearing on December 15 threatened to initiate perjury charges against Anurag Thakur for allegedly lying about asking the International Cricket Council (ICC) to term the Lodha reforms as governmental interference. During that hearing, Subramaniam told then Chief Justice of India TS Thakur that Anurag Thakur had lied on oath to the SC, having written in his affidavit that he had sought Shashank Manohar's opinion as ICC chairman. Subramanian argued that since Manohar had denied Anurag Thakur by saying that the question had been posed during an ICC meeting, the BCCI president had tried to obstruct the reform process.
The SCI appointed senior advocates Fali S Nariman and Gopal Subramaniam as amicus curiae and asked them to suggest the names of those deemed capable of administering the BCCI.
The SCI had threatened Anurag Thakur with a jail term if he was found guilty of lying under oath in an attempt to obstruct the Lodha Committee reforms, but reserved its order on a verdict.
No comments:
Post a Comment