PRADEEPSINH CHANDRASINH SOLANKI vs BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
Reserved On : 05/03/2026
Pronounced On : 16/03/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1670 of 2026

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA

==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
PRADEEPSINH CHANDRASINH SOLANKI & ANR.
Versus
BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MIHIR JOSHI SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR APURVA VAKIL SENIOR
ADVOCATE WITH MR ANUJ K TRIVEDI(6251) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
MS VAIDEHI N PARIKH(11568) WITH MR PRIT U SHAH ADVOCATES for
the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
MR SUDHIR NANAVATI SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR VANDAN K
BAXI(5863) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR SHALIN MEHTA SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR MRUGEN K
PUROHIT(1224) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
MR DEVANG NANAVATI SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR MANAN B
PANDYA(12491) for the Respondent(s) No. 4,5
MR SP MAJMUDAR(3456) for the Respondent(s) No. 4,5
MR MEET V JANI(13101) for the Respondent(s) No. 6,7
MR VARUN M PRADHAN(12729) for the Respondent(s) No. 6,7
MR SAURABH SOPARKAR SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR. SAHIL M
SHAH(6318) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
NANAVATI & NANAVATI(1933) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA


CAV JUDGMENT
Page 1 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
The present case is a glaring instance of non-exercise of
powers by the Electoral Officer and failure to discharge the
statutory duties cast upon him. The case further reflects a clear
attempt to circumvent the statutory provisions with a view to retain
authority and/or continue in power beyond the period prescribed
under the Rules and Regulations of the Baroda Cricket Association,
as well as in contravention of the directions issued by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 4235 of 2014.
[1] By way of the present petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, the petitioners, in their capacity as Members
of the Baroda Cricket Association, have challenged the legality and
validity of the candidature of respondent Nos. 4 to 7, who are
contesting for the posts of Office Bearers, namely President,
Secretary and Treasurer, for the term 2026–2029. The challenge is
founded on the ground that the said respondents stand disqualified,
having completed a cumulative tenure of nine years or more in the
capacity of Councillor and/or Office Bearer in the Apex Council.
Page 2 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
[2] The facts leading to the present Writ Petition, in
nutshell, are as under:
[2.1] Respondent No.2 is the State Cricket Association,
namely the Baroda Cricket Association (BCA), which is a member
of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) – Respondent
No.1, and is governed by its Memorandum of Association (MoA)
and the Rules and Regulations, as amended from time to time.
Respondent Nos.4 to 7 are members of BCA and have submitted
their nominations to contest the ensuing elections of BCA
th
scheduled to be held on 15 February 2026.
[2.2] The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in proceedings
concerning reforms in the BCCI and on the basis of the
recommendations of the Justice Lodha Committee, accepted the
principle of tenure-based disqualification, holding that any
individual who has completed a cumulative tenure of nine years in
a State Cricket Association shall incur disqualification. It was
further directed that upon completion of two consecutive terms, a
mandatory cooling-off period of three years shall be observed. The
Page 3 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
Apex Court also directed that the Bye-laws and Memorandum of
Association be suitably amended so as to incorporate provisions
relating to tenure, eligibility and disqualification.
th
[2.3] Pursuant to the Election Notification dated 6 January
2026 issued for conducting the elections of the Baroda Cricket
Association for the term 2026–2029, Respondent No.4 submitted
his nomination for the post of President, Respondent Nos.5 and 6
submitted their nominations for the post of Honorary Secretary,
and Respondent No.7 submitted his nomination for the post of
Honorary Treasurer.
[2.4] The petitioners, being members of the Baroda Cricket
th
Association, submitted written objections dated 20 January 2026
before Respondent No.3, the Electoral Officer, inter alia,
contending that Respondent Nos.4 to 7 stood disqualified in view of
the aforesaid judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The
petitioners also requested that an opportunity of hearing be
granted and prayed for rejection of the nominations submitted by
the said respondents.
Page 4 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
[2.5] It is an admitted position that the said objections were
neither adjudicated nor was any opportunity of hearing afforded to
the petitioners. More importantly, no order deciding the objections
was communicated to them. On the contrary, the Electoral Officer
proceeded to publish the final list of candidates.
[2.6] Subsequent to the publication of the final list, the
petitioners once again approached the Electoral Officer by way of a
th
representation dated 27 January 2026, reiterating that
Respondent Nos.4 to 7 had completed more than nine years of
tenure and were, therefore, disqualified. The said representation
also remained undecided. In the aforesaid circumstances, the
petitioners have preferred the present petition seeking enforcement
of the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and praying
for a direction restraining Respondent Nos.4 to 7 from contesting
the election.
[3] At the outset, it deserves to be noted that Respondent
Nos. 2 to 7, upon service of the advance copy of the petition,
Page 5 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
entered appearance before this Court, either through learned
advocates or in person, and raised a preliminary objection with
regard to the maintainability of the present petition, requesting that
the said issue be considered and decided at the threshold. This
Court, having heard the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties on the question of maintainability, by order dated
th
13 February 2026, rejected the preliminary objection and
proceeded to issue notice for final disposal of the petition, making
th
the same returnable on 17 February 2026. While doing so, this
Court granted ad-interim relief in the following terms:
“27. Having considered the totality of facts and circumstances
and as noted hereinabove, more particularly objections against
nomination appears to have been ignored and without passing
any order thereon, list of successful candidates having declared
in defiance of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court and
keeping mind that the voting is scheduled on 15.02.2026 and
the controversy raised in the present petition pertains to
acceptance of nomination of private respondents in the context
of tenure-based disqualification, which goes to the root of the
matter, this Court is of the view that if no interim protection is
granted, the petition may become infructuous. The same may
also result in multiplicity of proceedings and may create an
Page 6 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
irreversible situation. At the same time, grant of complete
interim relief by staying the election process at this stage may
not be appropriate. Therefore, in order to ensure equity, to
ensure that the proceedings do not become infructuous, by way
of ad-interim relief, it is directed that the voting scheduled on
15.02.2026 shall proceed. However, counting of votes and
publication of result shall not be made without prior permission
of this Court. The election officer shall ensure safe custody of
ballot papers and shall take all necessary steps to ensure
preservation of the relevant material and data in connection
with election process and further maintain complete secrecy.
28. It is clarified that permitting the private respondents to
contest the election shall not create any equity in their favour
and their participation shall remain subject to the final outcome
of the present proceedings and any further orders that may be
passed by this Court.”
[4] Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the respondents
herein preferred Letters Patent Appeals, being Letters Patent
Appeal Nos. 172 of 2026, 173 of 2026 and 174 of 2026. The said
appeals came to be permitted to be withdrawn by the Division
th
Bench of this Court vide order dated 16 February 2026.
Page 7 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
[5] Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. Mihir Joshi with
learned Senior Advocate Mr. Apurva Vakil, assisted by learned
advocates Mr. Anuj Trivedi, Ms. Vaidehi Parikh and Mr. Prit Shah
for the petitioners; learned Senior Advocate Mr. Sudhir Nanavati,
assisted by learned advocate Mr. Vandan Baxi for Nanavati &
Nanavati, for respondent No.2 – BCA; learned Senior Advocate Mr.
Shalin Mehta, assisted by learned advocate Mr. Mrugen Purohit for
respondent No.3 – the Electoral Officer; learned Senior Advocate
Mr. Devang Nanavati, assisted by learned advocates Mr. Manan
Pandya and Mr. S. P. Majmudar for respondent Nos.4 and 5;
learned advocates Mr. Meet Jani and Mr. Varun Pradhan for
respondent Nos.6 and 7; and learned Senior Advocate Mr. Saurabh
Soparkar, assisted by learned advocate Mr. Sahil Shah for
respondent No.1 – BCCI.
[6] Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Mihir Joshi, appearing for
the petitioners, while assailing the candidature of Respondent Nos.
4 to 7, has advanced the following submissions:
th
[6.1] It is submitted that the Election Notification dated 6
Page 8 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
January 2026 came to be issued for conducting elections for the
term 2026–2029, pursuant to which Respondent Nos. 4 to 7
submitted their nominations for the posts of President, Secretary
and Treasurer. The said nominations were objected to by the
th
petitioners by way of written objections dated 20 January 2026.
However, without adjudicating upon the said objections, the
Electoral Officer proceeded to publish the final list of candidates on
nd
22 January 2026. It is, therefore, contended that such action on
the part of the Electoral Officer is in gross violation of Clause 33(3)
of the Memorandum of Association. It is further submitted that
under Clause 33(3) of the MoA, a duty is cast upon the Electoral
Officer to decide any dispute or objection relating to candidature,
disqualification, eligibility to vote, or the acceptance or rejection of
votes in the election of the Apex Council or any Committee. The
failure to comply with the said mandate constitutes a serious
illegality striking at the very root of the democratic process. It is,
therefore, prayed that such arbitrary and high-handed action be
quashed and set aside and that Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 be declared
disqualified on the ground of tenure.
Page 9 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
[6.2] It is further submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court, in
the case of Board of Control for Cricket in India vs. Cricket
Association of Bihar reported in (2018) 9 SCC 624 , approved the
clauses and modifications suggested by the amicus curiae and
emphasized that the Electoral Officer shall be a former Member of
the Election Commission of India. It is contended that such a
requirement carries considerable significance inasmuch as the
Electoral Officer is entrusted with the responsibility of overseeing
and supervising the entire election process, including the scrutiny
of nomination forms. It is submitted that an Electoral Officer of
such stature is expected to conduct the election process with
utmost diligence so as to ensure fairness and impartiality. However,
in the present case, the Electoral Officer has failed to discharge
such obligation and has acted arbitrarily in not deciding the
objections raised by the petitioners, thereby resulting in a serious
miscarriage of justice.
[6.3] It is submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court has, from
time to time, in proceedings relating to reforms in BCCI, introduced
Page 10 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
tenure-based disqualification with the avowed object of preventing
concentration of power and ensuring that the electoral process
remains transparent and independent.
[6.4] It is further submitted that all the respondents have
completed nine years or more in their capacities as Office Bearers
and/or Councillors. A conjoint reading of Rule 6 with Rule 14 of
the Memorandum of Association would, therefore, render the
private respondents disqualified on the ground of tenure.
Consequently, their nominations ought to have been rejected by the
Electoral Officer.
[6.5] It is submitted that it is an admitted position that a
person who has completed nine years as a Councillor stands
disqualified from contesting the election for the post of Councillor.
In such circumstances, such a person cannot be permitted to
contest for the post of Office Bearer, as upon election such Office
Bearer becomes a Councillor in the Apex Council. It is submitted
that the Apex Council comprises 13 Councillors, of whom 5 are
elected Office Bearers, 5 are elected Councillors, one male and one
Page 11 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
female are nominated by the Cricket Players’ Association, and one
is nominated by the Accountant General of Gujarat. Thus, all
members of the Apex Council, irrespective of their designation as
Office Bearers or Councillors, fall within the definition of
“Councillor.” It is contended that the intention of the Hon’ble Apex
Court in prescribing tenure-based disqualification cannot be diluted
by interpreting the Regulations in a manner that permits a person
who has completed nine years as a Councillor to again hold office
as an Office Bearer for a further period. This is particularly so when
an Office Bearer, upon completing nine years, is debarred from
contesting for either post. Therefore, Respondent Nos. 4 to 7,
having completed nine years or more as Councillors and/or Office
Bearers, stand clearly disqualified and their nominations deserve to
be cancelled.
[6.6] It is further submitted that although the Hon’ble Apex
th
Court, by order dated 20 September 2019 passed in various
interlocutory applications in Civil Appeal No. 4235 of 2014, had
clarified that disqualification would be confined to those who had
held the posts of Office Bearers of Cricket Associations,
Page 12 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
th
subsequently, by judgment dated 14 September 2022 passed in
I.A. No. 49930 of 2020 in Civil Appeal No. 4235 of 2014, the
position came to be reconsidered and clarified.
[7] By making above submissions, learned Senior Advocate
Mr. Joshi for the petitioners requested this Court to allow the
present petition, as prayed for.
[8] Per contra, learned Senior Advocate Mr. Devang
Nanavati, assisted by learned advocates Mr. Manan Pandya and Mr.
S. P. Majmudar, appearing for Respondent Nos. 4 and 5, while
opposing the present petition, has advanced the following
submissions:
[8.1] It is submitted that the present petition under Article
226 of the Constitution of India, apart from the issue of
maintainability, ought not to be entertained inasmuch as the
dispute pertains to an election process. It is contended that issues
relating to the eligibility and qualification of candidates can be
agitated only by way of an Election Petition or through any other
remedy of a similar nature, as may be available under the
Page 13 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
provisions of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. In view of the
availability of such alternative statutory remedy, it is urged that the
present petition deserves to be dismissed.
[8.2] Without prejudice to the aforesaid contention, it is
submitted that Regulation 40 provides for the forum of an
Ombudsman, who is competent to adjudicate upon grievances of
the nature raised by the petitioners. It is, therefore, contended that
the present petition under Article 226 is not maintainable and is
liable to be dismissed on this ground as well.
[8.3] It is further submitted that Civil Appeal No. 4235 of
2014 is still pending before the Hon’ble Apex Court and, therefore,
in the event of any ambiguity or clarification with regard to tenure-
based disqualification, the petitioners ought to have approached
the Hon’ble Apex Court in the said proceedings. It is contended that
the Hon’ble Apex Court, upon being approached, has from time to
time clarified various aspects and, therefore, the appropriate course
for the petitioners was to seek relief in the pending proceedings
before the Hon’ble Apex Court rather than invoking the writ
Page 14 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India. On this ground also, dismissal of the present petition is
prayed for.
[8.4] It is submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court, by order
th
dated 20 September 2019 passed in various interlocutory
applications in Civil Appeal No. 4235 of 2014, clarified that
disqualification would be confined only to the posts of Office
Bearers of Cricket Associations. It is further submitted that the
th
subsequent judgment dated 14 September 2022 passed in I.A. No.
49930 of 2020 in Civil Appeal No. 4235 of 2014 was rendered in a
different factual context and, therefore, the said decision does not
dilute the earlier clarification. According to the respondents, both
the decisions of 2019 and 2022 operate independently.
[8.5] It is submitted that the reformatory directions issued by
the Hon’ble Apex Court pertain only to “Office Bearers”. It is
contended that a Councillor who has completed a cumulative
tenure of nine years as an “Office Bearer” would stand disqualified
for all purposes. However, such disqualified person may still be
Page 15 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
eligible to contest as an elected Councillor. Conversely, it is
contended that there is no restriction on a person who has
completed nine years as a “Councillor” from contesting for the post
of Office Bearer for a further period, subject to the requirement of a
cooling-off period. On this basis, it is urged that the present petition
deserves to be dismissed.
[8.6] It is further submitted that the restriction and
disqualification contemplated under the reformatory directions of
the Hon’ble Apex Court as well as the Bye-laws are confined only to
“Office Bearers”, and no reference has been made to “Councillors”
or members of any Committee. It is, therefore, contended that a
Councillor who has completed nine years in such capacity would
nonetheless remain eligible to contest for the post of Office Bearer.
It is argued that any interpretation to the contrary would amount to
importing words into, or enlarging the scope of, the judgment of
the Hon’ble Apex Court, which is impermissible in law.
[8.7] It is submitted that Regulation 6(5)(e) specifically
employs the expression “Office Bearer” and not “Apex Council”.
Page 16 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
Therefore, to hold that a member of the Apex Council stands
disqualified from contesting for the post of Office Bearer on the
ground of having completed nine years as a member of the Apex
Council would amount to rewriting the provision, which is
impermissible. In support of this contention, reliance is placed upon
th
the clarification and/or advisory dated 24 September 2019 issued
by the Committee of Administrators, which suggests that, for the
purpose of computing the period of nine years, only the tenure
served as an “Office Bearer” is required to be taken into
consideration.
[9] By making above submissions, learned Senior Advocate
Mr. Nanavati for the respondents Nos.4 and 5 has prayed this Court
to dismiss the present petition.
[10] Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Sudhir Nanavati for
Nanavati & Nanavati for the respondent No.2 – Baroda Cricket
Association, while opposing the present petition, has made the
following submissions:
Page 17 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
[10.1] Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Devang Nanavati,
appearing for Respondent No.2, while adopting the submissions
advanced on behalf of Respondent Nos.4 and 5, has further invited
the attention of this Court to Regulation 14 to contend that the
Apex Council comprises 13 Councillors. It is submitted that there
are two distinct modes of entry into the Apex Council: one by way
of election to the posts of “Office Bearers”, namely President, Vice
President, Secretary, Joint Secretary and Treasurer; and the other
by way of election as “Councillors” in terms of Regulation 14(2)(a).
It is further submitted that Regulation 14(3)(e) contemplates
disqualification for being a Councillor only in a case where an
individual has held the post of “Office Bearer” for a cumulative
period of nine years. Thus, according to the learned Senior
Advocate, a Councillor incurs disqualification only upon completion
of nine years in the capacity of an “Office Bearer”. It is, therefore,
contended that while an “Office Bearer”, upon completion of nine
years, would be rendered ineligible to hold any position, including
that of a Councillor or a member of any Committee, a “Councillor”
who has completed nine years in the Apex Council may be barred
Page 18 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
from re-election as a Councillor but would nevertheless remain
eligible to contest for the post of “Office Bearer” for a further
period, subject to the requirement of a cooling-off period. On this
basis, dismissal of the present petition is prayed for.
[11] Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Nanavati for Respondent
No.2 has further placed considerable reliance upon the definition of
“Office Bearer” to contend that the same is specifically defined to
include the President, Vice President, Secretary, Joint Secretary and
Treasurer. It is submitted that the term “Councillor” is separately
defined and, therefore, both categories are distinct and cannot be
conflated. It is contended that wherever the expression “Office
Bearer” is employed in the Regulations, the same must be
construed strictly to mean only such Office Bearers. It is further
submitted that Regulation 6(5)(e) must be interpreted strictly in
the context of “Office Bearer” alone, and its scope cannot be
enlarged so as to include an “Apex Council Member” within its
ambit.
Page 19 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
[11.1] On the aforesaid factual premise, it is submitted
that Respondent No.4 – Mr. Kiran More has served as an “Office
Bearer” for a period of seven years and as a “Member” for two years
and, therefore, remains eligible to contest for the post of “Office
Bearer” up to the maximum permissible tenure of nine years. It is
further submitted that although he has served as a member of the
Apex Council for seven years, he would thereafter be rendered
ineligible to contest further elections. Similarly, in respect of
Respondent No.5 – Mr. Amul Jikar, it is submitted that
notwithstanding his tenure of eight years as a member of the Apex
Council, he has served only six years as an “Office Bearer” and is,
therefore, eligible to contest for the said post. Insofar as
Respondent No.6 – Mr. Anant Indulkar is concerned, it is submitted
that although he has served for twelve years as a member of the
Apex Council, he still has remaining tenure available in the capacity
of “Office Bearer” and, therefore, his candidature is valid. Likewise,
in respect of Respondent No.7 – Mr. Amar Petiwale, it is submitted
that despite having served for fifteen years as a member of the
Apex Council, he continues to have a balance tenure of three years
Page 20 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
as an “Office Bearer” and, accordingly, his candidature is also valid.
[12] By making above submissions, learned Senior Advocate
Mr. Nanavati for the respondent No.2, therefore, submitted that
present petition, being devoid of any merits, deserves to be
dismissed.
[13] Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Saurabh Soparkar,
assisted by learned advocate Mr. Sahil Shah for Respondent No.1 –
BCCI, while opposing the present petition, has advanced the
following submissions:
[13.1] It is submitted that the Board of Control for
Cricket in India (BCCI) has been erroneously impleaded as a party
respondent in the present proceedings, inasmuch as it has no role
to play in the internal affairs of the Baroda Cricket Association.
According to learned Senior Advocate Mr. Soparkar, the BCCI is an
independently registered society and/or trust governed by its own
Bye-laws, and there exists no supervisory control over the Baroda
Cricket Association unless its Bye-laws are found to be inconsistent
with those of the BCCI.
Page 21 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
[13.2] It is further submitted that the guidelines/
advisory issued by the Committee of Administrators merely reflect
its understanding and interpretation of the decisions of the Hon’ble
Apex Court, and such interpretation cannot be regarded as binding
upon this Court. It is contended that any interpretation rendered by
this Court would attain finality and prevail over such advisory or
guidelines.
[14] By making the aforesaid submissions, learned Senior
Advocate Mr. Soparkar for Respondent No.1 – BCCI has requested
this Court to dismiss the present petition.
[15] Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Shalin Mehta, assisted by
learned advocate Mr. Mrugen Purohit for Respondent No.3 – the
Electoral Officer, while opposing the present petition, has advanced
the following submissions:
[15.1] It is submitted that the written objections dated
20th January 2026 preferred by the petitioners with regard to the
nominations of Respondent Nos.4 to 7 were duly considered and
Page 22 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
examined in light of the Memorandum of Association and the Rules
and Regulations of the Baroda Cricket Association. It is contended
that upon such examination it was found that Respondent Nos.4 to
7 had not completed nine years in the capacity of “Office Bearers”
of the Baroda Cricket Association and, therefore, had not incurred
any disqualification in terms of Rule 6 read with Rule 14. It is
further submitted that the entire exercise undertaken by
Respondent No.3 – the Electoral Officer has been kept in a sealed
cover and can be produced before this Court for its perusal, if so
directed. It is submitted that since the nominations and
candidatures of Respondent Nos.4 to 7 were found to be valid and
in consonance with the provisions of the Memorandum of
Association, the same were rightly included in the final list of
candidates for the BCA Elections for the term 2026–2029. It is,
therefore, contended that no illegality can be attributed to the
Electoral Officer.
[15.2] Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Mehta, appearing for
Respondent No.3, while adopting the submissions advanced by
learned Senior Advocate Mr. Devang Nanavati for Respondent
Page 23 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
Nos.4 and 5 and learned Senior Advocate Mr. Sudhir Nanavati for
Respondent No.2, has submitted that Respondent Nos.4 to 7 are
eligible to contest the election for the posts of “Office Bearers”,
inasmuch as none of the said candidates has yet exhausted the
maximum permissible tenure of nine years in the category of
“Office Bearer”. It is, therefore, contended that their nominations
are valid and do not warrant any interference.
[16] By making above submissions, learned Senior Advocate
Mr. Mehta for the respondent No.3 – Electoral Officer requested
this Court to dismiss the present petition.
[17] Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties and having perused the material placed on
record, the principal question that arises for consideration of this
Court is whether, in the facts and circumstances of the present case,
and in light of the directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in
Civil Appeal No. 4235 of 2014, as well as upon a conjoint reading
of Rules 6 and 14 of the Rules and Regulations of the Baroda
Cricket Association, Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 can be said to have
Page 24 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
incurred disqualification from contesting the election for the posts
of “Office Bearers” of the Baroda Cricket Association, and further,
whether the Electoral Officer, in exercise of powers under
Regulation 33, was justified in not adjudicating upon the objections
raised by the petitioners and in accepting the nomination forms of
the said respondents by including their names in the final list of
candidates for the election for the term 2026–2029.
[18] In order to adjudicate the aforesaid question, it is
necessary to consider the object and purpose underlying the
concept of a cooling-off period and the tenure-based
disqualification as directed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The
Baroda Cricket Association is governed by its Memorandum of
Association and the Rules and Regulations framed thereunder. The
said Rules and Regulations have been formulated by the BCA in
accordance with the directions issued from time to time by the
Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 4235 of 2014, while
accepting the recommendations made by the Committee
constituted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court for reforms in the BCCI
and other Cricket Associations. Thus, the object and purpose, as
Page 25 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
reflected in the Memorandum of Association of the BCA, are
reproduced hereinbelow:
“The Objects and purposes of BCA are:
(a) To control and improve quality and standards of the
game of cricket in the erstwhile Baroda State, lay down
policies, roadmaps, guidelines and make rules and
regulations (and amend or alter them) in all matters
relating to the game of Cricket, recognize that the primary
stakeholders are the players and Cricket fans in areas under
BCA's jurisdiction, and that accountability, transparency and
integrity of the game are the core values;
(b) To provide for measures necessary for promotion and
development of the game of cricket, welfare and interest of
Cricketers and elimination of unethical and unfair practices
in the Game of cricket: and for that purpose, organize
coaching schemes, establish coaching academies, hold
tournaments, exhibition matches, First Class Matches, List A
Matches, Test Matches, ODIs, Twenty/20, and all other
matches and take all other required steps;
(c) To strive for sportsmanship and professionalism in the game
of cricket and its governance and administration, inculcate
Page 26 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
principle of transparency and ethical standards in players,
team officials, umpires and administrators and to ban
doping, age fraud, sexual harassment and all other forms of
inequity and discrimination;
(d) To encourage the formation of District Cricket
Association in the erstwhile state of Baroda and the
organization of Inter-district and other Tournaments, to lay
down norms for recognition which achieve uniformity in the
structure, functioning and processes of the District Cricket
Associations;
(e) To arrange, control regulate and if necessary finance visit
of Teams that are Members of the BCCI and teams of other
Countries to India;
(f) To arrange, control, regulate and finance, visit of Baroda
Cricket Teams to four countries that are members of the
International Cricket Council or elsewhere in conjunction
with the bodies governing cricket in the countries to be
visited;
(g) To select teams to represent BCA in BCCI Tournaments
and all other Tournaments in all formats & in all age group
(Men & Women) in India or abroad as BCA may decide from
time to time;
Page 27 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
(h) To foster the spirit of sportsmanship and the ideals of
cricket amongst school, college and university students and
others and to educate them regarding the same;
(i) To nominate BCA's representative/s for the BCCI meetings
as also to conferences and seminars connected with the game
of cricket.
(j) To appoint managers and/or other team officials for the
BCA;
(k) To employ and appoint CEOs, professional managers,
auditors, executive secretaries administrative officers,
assistant secretaries, managers, clerks, team support staff,
players, and other service personnel and staff, and boy
remunerate them for their service, by way of salaries, wages,
gratuities, pensions, honoraria, ex-gratia payments and/or
provident fund, and to remove/terminate or dismiss such
employees or personnel;
(1) To ensure that tickets to cricket matches are widely
available well in advance of the matches to members of the
public at reasonable rates, and to prevent distribution of the
same as largesse, and to offer seats gratis or at nominal rates
to students,
Page 28 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
(m) To lay out cricket grounds and to provide pavilion,
canteen and other facilities and amenities for the
convenience and benefit of the members, players and the
Cricket fans including the woman and disabled, and to
ensure the availability of Cricket gear and amenities to
Cricket players.:
(n) To constitute Committees, from time to time and entrust
or delegate its functions and duties to such Committees, for
achieving the objects of BCA.
(o) To vest immovable properties and funds of BCA in
Trustees appointed by it, for carrying out the objects of BCA;
(p) To sell, manage, mortgage, lease, exchange, dispose of or
otherwise deal with all or any property of BCA;
(q) To acquire or purchase properties movable and
immovable, and assets- tangible and intangible, and to apply
the capital and income therefrom and proceeds of the sale or
transfer thereof, for or towards all or any of the objects of
BCA;
(r) To collect funds, and wherever necessary, borrow with or
without security and to purchase, redeem or pay off any such
Page 29 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
securities;
(s) To carry out any other activity which may seem to the
BCA, capable of being conveniently carried on in connection
with the above, or calculated directly or indirectly to enhance
the value or render profitable or generate better
income/revenue, from any of the properties assets and rights
of BCA;
(t) To promote, protect and assist the Players who are the
primary agents of the game by:
i. Creating a Players Association,
ii. Being sensitive to players before domestic calendars are
drawn up so that sufficient time is provided for rest and
recovery,
iii. Taking steps, particularly on longer tours, so the
emotional wellbeing and family bonds of the Players are
strengthened.
iv. Preferably having qualified Physiotherapists. Mental
Conditioning coaches/Counsellors and Nutritionists among
the team's support staff
Page 30 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
v. Having a single point of contact on the logistics and
managerial side so that Players' can fully concentrate on the
game;
(u) To grant/donate such sum/s for:
i. Such cause as would be deemed fit by BCA conducive to
the promotion of the game of cricket.
ii. The benefit of Cricketers or their spouses and children
by introducing benevolent fund schemes or other benefits
schemes, as BCA deems fit, subject to its rules and
regulations:
iii. The benefit of any other persons who have served
Cricket or their spouses and children as BCA may consider
fit
iv. To award sponsorship to sportspersons in games other
than Cricket for development of their individual skills,
and
v. To donate to any charitable cause:
(v) To start or sponsor and/or to subscribe to funds or stage
matches for the benefit of the Cricketers or persons who may have
rendered services to the game of Cricket or for their families, or to
Page 31 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
donate towards the development or promotion of the game and to
organize matches in aid of Public Charitable and Relief Funds;
(w) To impart physical education through the medium of
Cricket;
(x) To co-ordinate the activities of members and institution in
relation to BCA and amongst themselves;
(y) To create and maintain a central repository and database
of all Cricketers along with their game statistics;
(z)To introduce a scheme of professionalism and to implement the
same;
(aa) To provide a fair and transparent grievance redressal
mechanism to players, support personnel and other entities
associated with Cricket,
(bb) Generally, to do all such other acts and things as may seems
to BCA to be convenient and/or conducive to the carrying out of
the objects of BCA;”
[18.1] The relevant provisions of Rules which are
applicable to BCA and those are para materia to the Rules of BCCI
Page 32 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
are as under:
“1 (A) DEFINATIONS
(c) “ APEX COUNCIL" is the principal body of BCA tasked with
its governance as set out in Rule 14.
(E) “BCA” is Baroda Cricket Association initially registered
under Mumbai Public Trust Act 1950, now recognized as the
Gujarat Public Trust Act 1950. Registered office of the trust is
situated at Vadodara & therefore the jurisdiction of the trust is
the charity commissioner office, Vadodara.
(g) “ CONFLICT OF INTEREST” refers to situations where an
individual associated with BCA in any capacity acts or omits to
act in a manner that brings, or is perceived to bring the interest
of the individual in conflict with the interest of the game of
cricket and that may give rise to apprehensions of, or actual
favoritism, lack of objectivity, bias, benefits (monetary or
otherwise) or linkage, as set out in Rule 38.
(k) “ELECTORAL OFFICER" is the person appointed to
conduct supervise and deal with issue concerning elections as set
out in Rule 33.
Page 33 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
(o) “GENERAL BODY" is the supreme body of BCA which is
constituted by its Member.
(p) “ GOVERNING COUNCIL" is the Standing Committee
consisted by BCA which shall be in charge of and conduct the
Baroda Premier League.
(u) "OFFICE BEARER” means the President, Vice-President,
Secretary, Joint Secretary and Treasurer.
(x) "PRESIDENT" is the Honorary President of BCA and of
the Apex Council as set out in Rule 7(1).
(dd) “ TREASURER" is the Treasurer of BCA as set out in Rule
7(5).
(ee) "VICE PRESIDENT” is the Vice President of BCA as set
out in Rule 7(2).
(hh) “CONSTITUTION" means the present Memorandum Of
Association and Rules And Regulations registered in accordance
th
with the Judgement dated 9 August 2018 of Hon’ble Supreme
Court of India in Civil Appeal No:4235 of 2014.”
[18.2] Rule 6 provides for election and term of “Office
Page 34 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
Bearer” and other Committees, which reads as under:
“6. ELECTIONS & TERM OF OFFICE BEARERS & OTHER
COMMITTEES
(1) The following Office Bearers & other committees of BCA
shall be elected by the Members of BCA from amongst them at
Annual General Meeting
1 Elected Office Bearers
1. The President
2. The Vice-President
3. The Secretary
4. The Joint Secretary
5. The Treasurer
2. Councilor as per 14.2.a
3. Elected Sub-Committees
i. Ground & Infrastructure Committee
ii. Finance Committee
iii. Press Publicity Committee
Page 35 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
All the above three elected sub committees should consist of
seven members each, as per BCA's previous constitution.
(2) The Term of office of an Apex Council members and other
committees shall be 3 years. Their position shall be Honorary.
(3) No person shall be an Office bearer for more than 3 terms in
all.
(4)
1. An office bearer who has held any post for two
consecutive terms in the BCA shall not be eligible to
contest any further election in the BCA without
completing a cooling off period of three years.
During this cooling off period, such an office bearer shall
not be a member of the Governing Council or of any
committee whatsoever of the BCA.
The expression "Office bearer should not be permitted to
he circumvented by being a member of any other
committee or of the Governing Council in the BCA, as the
case may be
2. If a person has served two consecutive terms each, in
Page 36 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
the BCA and in the BCCI (or vice versa) continuously
without any break, such person shall not be eligible to
contest any further election in the ICA or in the BCCI
without completing a cooling off period of three years,
During this cooling off period, such an office bearer shall
not be a member of the Governing Council or of any
committee whatsoever of the BCCI or of the BCA The
expression 'Office bearer" should not be permitted to be
circumvented by being a member of any other committee
or of the Governing Council in BCCL or the BCA, as the
case may be
(5) A person shall be disqualified from being an Office Bearer, a
member of the Apes Council, Governing Council or any
Committee or a representative to the BCCI if he or she:
a. is not a citizen of India,
b. has attained the age of 70 years:
c. is declared to be insolvent, or of unsound mind.
d. is a Minister or Government Servant
e. has been an Office Bearer of the BCCI or the BCA
for a cumulative period of 9 years: or
Page 37 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
f. has been convicted by a Court of Law for commission of
a criminal offence and sentenced to imprisonment.
(6) Any member desirous of getting elected to Apex Council post
should have been a member of the association during the 3
years preceding the year in which election is held Further for
becoming an Apex Council member, be should have been a
member of any one elected sub-committee mentioned below for
one full term.
i. Ground & Infrastructure Committee
ii. Finance Committee
ii. Press Publicity Committee
The members who have not been elected in the sub-committees
are mandatorily required to fulfill the above eligibility
conditions by getting elected in the revised list of sub-committees
in the amended constitutions.”
[18.3] Rule 7 provides for power and duties of the
“Office Bearer” and elected sub-Committees, which reads as under:
“7. POWERS AND DUTIES OF OFFICE BEARERS &
ELECTED SUB-COMMITTEES:
Page 38 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
(1) THE PRESIDENT
a. The President shall preside at all meetings of the
General Body and the Apex Council
b. The President shall be one of the three persons who
shall sign the audited annual accounts and other financial
statements of BCA
c. The President shall also exercise such functions and
duties as he may be empowered with by the General body
or the Apex Council.
d. The President shall in the event of a vacancy or
indisposition of an Office Bearer, delegate the functions to
another Office Bearer until the vacancy is duly filled up,
or the indisposition ceases.
(2) THE VICE PRESIDENT
a. The Vice President shall officiate in the President's
absences when the President is unavailable.
b. The Vice President shall also exercise such functions
and duties as he may be empowered by the Apex Council.
Page 39 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
(3) THE SECRETARY
The Secretary Shall:
a. Keep and maintain the minutes of Annual General
Meetings and Special General Meetings of the General
Body, the meetings of the Apex Council and of the
Committees appointed by the General Body in appropriate
books and shall cause them to be properly and correctly
recorded and confirmed.
b. Be one of the three persons who shall sign the audited
annual accounts and other financial statements of BCA.
c. Be in charge of the records of the General Body, the
Apex Council, the Governing Council and Committees,
and such properties as may be entrusted to his care by
BCA, the Apex Council or the Governing Council as the
case may be.
d. Convene the Annual General meetings, the Special
General Meetings and the meetings of the Apex Council
and Governing Council with the concurrence of the
President.
e. Circulate to all Members of the BCA the statement
of accounts prepared by the Treasurer.
Page 40 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
f. Have the power to Delegate any power to the Hon. Joint
Secretary with the consent and approval of the Apex
Council.
(4) THE JOINT SECRETARY
The Joint Secretary shall:
a. Convene and keep minutes of the Committees that may
be placed in his charge at the Annual General Meeting
or by the Secretary.
b. The Joint Secretary shall officiate with the consent and
approval of the Apex Council.
(5) THE TREASURER
The Treasurer shall:
a. Receive all subscriptions and donations and the monies
payable and/or receivable by BCA.
b. Be one of the three persons who shall sign the audited
annual accounts and other financial statements of the
BCA.
c. Keep accounts of all monies received and expended by
BCA, in respect of asset, credits and liabilities of BCA.
Page 41 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
d. Prepare statement of accounts.
e. Place before the Apex Council:
1. Annual Balance Sheet:
2. Statement of Accounts of BCA, and
3. Annual Budget:
f. Place before the Annual General Meeting duly audited:
1. Annual Balance Sheet, and
2. Statement of Accounts of .
ВСА
g. Invest and/or disburse the funds of BCA to withdraw
any or all of the existing fixed deposits before the date of
maturity in accordance with any general or special
directions of the General Body or the Apex Council.
h. Prepare budget to be presented at the Annual General
Meeting, Special General Meetings and Meetings of the
Apes council.
i. Coordinate with the Auditor as well as the CEO to
obtain insight into the utilization of funds by the districts.
(6) Ground & Infrastructure Committee - To oversee various
Page 42 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
Grounds under areas of Jurisdiction of BCA and to co-ordinate
and develop the infrastructure facilities at various grounds
(7) Finance Committee - To propose Annual Budget to the
CEO and Apex Council. To Assist and guide the CEO and Apex
Council in all compliances related matters. To Assist CEO and
Apex Council in the finalization of the Annual Accounts
(8) Press Publicity Committee - The Committee Shall be
responsible for coverage of the activities of the Association
through the Press, It should also take cognizance of any
comments affecting the association and bring them to the notice
of the Apex Council.”
[18.4] Rule 14 assumes significance in relation to the
governance structure of the Baroda Cricket Association. In terms of
the said Rule, there shall be an Apex Council of the BCA, which
shall be primarily responsible for the governance and
administration of the affairs of the Association. The Apex
Council shall consist of 13 Councillors, out of whom 5 shall be
elected as “Office Bearers” in accordance with Rule 6, while the
remaining 8 shall be elected in the manner prescribed under
Rule 14(2).
Page 43 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
[18.5] As per Rule 14(3)(e), a person shall stand disqualified
from being a Councillor if he or she has served as an “Office
Bearer” of the BCCI for a cumulative period of nine years or as an
“Office Bearer” of the BCA for a cumulative period of nine years.
Further, Rule 14(4-A) provides that each elected Councillor shall
hold office for a term of three years, subject to a maximum of three
terms on the Apex Council. It is further stipulated that a Councillor
who has held any post for two consecutive terms in the BCA shall
not be eligible to contest any further election in the BCA unless he
or she undergoes a cooling-off period of three years. During such
cooling-off period, the concerned individual shall not be eligible to
serve as a member of the Governing Council or of any committee
whatsoever of the BCA. The Rule further clarifies that the
expression “Councillor” shall not be permitted to be circumvented
by becoming a member of any other committee or of the Governing
Council in the BCCI or the BCA, as the case may be. Rule 14 of the
Baroda Cricket Association reads as under:
“14. THE APEX COUNCIL
Page 44 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
1. There shall be an Apex Council for BCA which shall be
primarily responsible for the governance of the affairs of BCA.
2. The Apex Council shall comprise of 13 Councilors of whom 5
shall be the elected Office Bearers as per Rule 6 and the
remaining 8 shall be:
a. Five Councilors to be elected by the members of BCA
from amongst themselves.
b. Two, one male and one female to be nominated by the
Cricket Player's Association.
c. One to be nominated by the Accountant General of
Gujarat from among the serving senior functionaries in
the said office, co-terminus with the nominee’s tenure.
3. A person shall be disqualified from being a Councilor if he or
she
a. is not a citizen of India:
b. has attained the age of 70 years:
c. is declared to be insolvent, or of unsound mind;
d. is a Minister or a Government Servant.
Page 45 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
e. has been an Office Bearer of the BCCI for a cumulative
period of 9 years or of the BCA for a cumulative period of 9
years; or
f. has been convicted by a Court of Law for commission of a
criminal offence and sentenced to imprisonment.
4.
A. Each of the elected Councilors shall have a term of 3 years in
office, subject to a maximum of 3 Terms on the Apex Council.
A Councilor who has held any post for two consecutive Terms
in the BCA shall not be eligible to contest any further election
in the BCA without completing a cooling off period of three
years. During the cooling off period, such a Councilor shall
not be a member of the Governing Council or of any
committee whatsoever of the BCA. The expression "Councilor
should not be permitted to be circumvented by being a
member of any other committee or of the Governing Council
in BCA,
B. If a person has served two consecutive terms each as
Councilor in the equivalent body of the BCA and in the BCCI
(or vice a versa) continuously without any break such person
shall not be eligible to be a Councilor in the equivalent body
of the BCA or in the BCCI without completing a cooling off
Page 46 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
period of three years. During the cooling off period, such a
Councilor shall not be a member of the Governing Council or
of any committee whatsoever of the BCCI or of the BCA. The
expression "Councilor should not be permitted to be
circumvented by being a member of any other committee or
of the Governing Council in BCCI or the BCA, as the case
may be.
5. No individual, including one filling up a vacancy under
Sub-Rule (9) below shall be a Councilor for more than 9 years.
In the event of a Councilor completing 9 years before the expiry
of his term, he shall cease to hold office on completion of 9
years.
6. No nominated Councilor shall have more than one term
of 3 years.
7. Notwithstanding anything contained elsewhere in these
Rule, a former President of BCA shall not be entitled to be
elected or nominated to the Apex Council in any capacity except
for other terms as President subject to sub-Rules (4) and (5)
above.
8. No councilor, once elected at BCCI, shall hold any office in
BCA. BCA shall take steps to fill up the vacancy so created
immediately.
Page 47 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
9. Any vacancy in the Apex Council due to death, resignation,
insolvency, unsoundness of mind, nomination of the BCCI or
other disqualification shall be filled up for the remaining period:
A. In the case of an elected Councilor, by elections at a
Special General Body meeting of BCA convened by the
Secretary for that purpose within 45 days:
B. In the case of nominated Councilor, in the same
manner as prescribed for the respective nominee in
Rule 14(2) above;
10. For the purpose of the GPT Act, 1960, the governing body of
BCA shall be the Apes Council.”
[18.6] Rule 33 relates to the appointment and functions
of the “Electoral Officer”. As per Rule 33(1), the Electoral Officer
shall be a former Member of the Election Commission of the State.
Rule 33(2) provides that the Electoral Officer shall oversee and
supervise the entire election process, including the scrutiny of the
electoral rolls of the Councillors and the Players’ Cricket
Association. The said provision further stipulates that all
nominations and candidatures shall be subject to the scrutiny of the
Page 48 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
Electoral Officer in accordance with the Rules. Rule 33(3) further
casts a duty upon the Electoral Officer, so appointed by the
Councillors, to decide any dispute or objection relating to
candidature, disqualification, eligibility to vote, or the acceptance
or rejection of a vote in the election to the Apex Council. Rule 33,
therefore, reads as under:
“33. THE ELECTORAL OFFICER
1. At least four weeks prior to the Annual General Meeting at
which an election is to be held, the Apex Council shall
appoint an Electoral Officer, who shall be a former member
of the Election Commission of State.
2. The Electoral Officer shall oversee and supervise the entire
election process including scrutiny of the electoral rolls of
Councilors and the players Cricket Association, which shall
include all nominations and candidatures being subject to his
scrutiny in accordance with the rules.
3. In case of the dispute or objection as to candidacy,
disqualification, eligibility to vote, or the admission or
rejection of a vote in the election to the Apex Council, the
player's Cricket Association or any of the Committees, the
Page 49 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
Electoral Officer shall decide the same and such decision shall
be final and conclusive.”
[19] While considering the questions involved in the present
proceedings, it would be apposite to refer to the historical
background which led to the framing of the Memorandum of
Association and the relevant Rules and Regulations by the BCCI
and, consequently, by the respective State Cricket Associations.
[19.1] The proceedings before the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in Civil Appeal No. 4235 of 2014 arose out of two Writ
Petitions filed in public interest by the Cricket Association of Bihar
before the High Court of Bombay, seeking various reliefs, including
a writ in the nature of mandamus for inquiry into allegations of
betting and spot-fixing in the Indian Premier League (IPL). The
petitions contained serious allegations of sporting frauds such as
match-fixing and betting, as well as accusations of malpractices and
conflict of interest. In view of such allegations, a Probe Commission
came to be constituted to inquire into the matters in question. The
Probe Commission thereafter submitted its report, which came to
Page 50 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
th
be considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its order dated 16
May 2014, reported in (2014) 7 SCC 383. By the said order, the
Hon’ble Supreme Court permitted the Probe Commission to
conduct an inquiry into the allegations. Subsequently, the Writ
Petitions and Appeals were heard at length by the Hon’ble Supreme
nd
Court and, by its judgment dated 22 January 2015 in the case of
Board of Control for Cricket in India vs. Cricket Association of
Bihar and Others reported in (2015) 3 SCC 251 , the Hon’ble
Supreme Court formulated the following questions for its
consideration (paras 20.1 to 20.7 at page 274), which read as
under:
“20.1 (i) Whether the respondent-Board of Cricket Control of
India is 'State' within the meaning of Article 12 and if 19 it is
not, whether it is amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the High
Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India? (See Paras
22 to 35)
20.2 (ii) Whether Gurunath Meiyappan and Raj Kundra were
'team officials' of their respective IPL teams - Chennai Super
Kings and Rajasthan Royals? If so, whether allegations of
betting levelled against them stand proved?(See Paras 61 to 53)
Page 51 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
20.3 (iii) If question No.2 is answered in the affirmative, what
consequential action in the nature of punishment is permissible
under the relevant Rules and Regulations, and against whom?
(See Paras 54 to 69)
20.4 (iv) Whether allegations of cover up, levelled against Mr.
N. Srinivasan stand proved. If so, to what effect? (See Paras 70
to 72)
20.5 (v) Whether Regulation 6.2.4 to the extent it permits
administrators to have commercial interest in the IPL,
Champions League and Twenty-20 events is legally bad? (See
Paras 73 to 107)
20.6 (vi) Whether allegations levelled against Mr. Sundar
Raman, Chief Operating Officer IPL, stand proved? If so, to
what effect? (See Paras 108 to 115)
20.7 (vii) What orders and directions need be passed in the
light of the discussions and answers to questions 1 to 5 above?
(See Paras 116 to 120)”
[19.2] The Hon’ble Supreme Court also considered the
question regarding the maintainability of the writ petitions against
Page 52 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
the BCCI, particularly whether the BCCI could be regarded as
“State” within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of
India. In paragraphs 22 to 35 of the judgment, the Hon’ble
Supreme Court examined the said issue and held that although the
BCCI may not fall within the definition of “State” under Article 12
of the Constitution of India, it would nonetheless be amenable to
the writ jurisdiction of the High Courts under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India. In this regard, the Hon’ble Supreme Court
nd
observed as under in its judgment dated 22 January 2014
reported in (2015) 3 SCC 251 (paras 33 to 35 at pages 281 to
282):
“33. The majority view thus favours the view that BCCI is
amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under
Article 226 even when it is not 'State' within the meaning of
Article 12. The rationale underlying that view if we may say
with utmost respect lies in the "nature of duties and functions"
which the BCCI performs. It is common ground that the
respondent-Board has a complete sway over the game of cricket
in this country. It regulates and controls the game to the
exclusion of all others. It formulates rules, regulations norms
and standards covering all aspect of the game. It enjoys the
Page 53 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
power of choosing the members of the national team and the
umpires. It exercises the power of disqualifying players which
may at times put an end to the sporting career of a person. It
spends crores of rupees on building and maintaining
infrastructure like stadia, running of cricket academies and
Supporting State Associations. It frames pension schemes and
incurs expenditure on coaches, trainers etc. It sells broadcast
and telecast rights and collects admission fee to venues where
the matches are played. All these activities are undertaken with
the tacit concurrence of the State Government and the
Government of India who are not only fully aware but
supportive of the activities of the Board. The State has not
chosen to bring any law or taken any other step that would
either deprive or dilute the Board's monopoly in the field of
cricket. On the contrary, the Government of India have allowed
the Board to select the national team which is then recognized
by all concerned and applauded by the entire nation including
at times by the highest of the dignitaries when they win
tournaments and bring laurels home. Those distinguishing
themselves in the international arena are conferred highest
civilian awards like the Bharat Ratna, Padma Vibhushan,
Padma Bhushan and Padma Shri apart from sporting awards
instituted by the Government. Such is the passion for this game
in this country that cricketers are seen as icons by youngsters,
middle aged and the old alike. Any organization or entity that
has such pervasive control over the game and its affairs and
Page 54 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
such powers as can make dreams end up in smoke or come true
cannot be said to be undertaking any private activity.
34. The functions of the Board are clearly public functions,
which, till such time the State intervenes to 35 takeover the
same, remain in the nature of public functions, no matter
discharged by a society registered under the Registration of
Societies Act. Suffice it to say that if the Government not only
allows an autonomous/private body to discharge functions
which it could in law takeover or regulate but even lends its
assistance to such a non-government body to undertake such
functions which by their very nature are public functions, it
cannot be said that the functions are not public functions or
that the entity discharging the same is not answerable on the
standards generally applicable to judicial review of State action.
35. Our answer to question No.1, therefore, is in the negative,
qua, the first part and affirmative qua the second. BCCI may
not be State under Article 12 of the Constitution but is certainly
amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India.”
[19.3] In the aforesaid decision, the Hon’ble Supreme
Court further constituted a Committee comprising Hon’ble Mr.
Justice R. M. Lodha, former Chief Justice of India, as Chairman;
Page 55 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ashok Bhan, former Judge of the Supreme
Court of India, as Member; and Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. V.
Raveendran, former Judge of the Supreme Court of India, as
Member. The Hon’ble Supreme Court requested the said Committee
to examine the existing framework and to make suitable
recommendations to the BCCI for necessary reforms. Accordingly,
nd
in its judgment 22 January 2015 reported in (2015) 3 SCC 251,
the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as under (paras 119.1 to
119.4 at pages 324 to 325):
“119.1 Amendments considered necessary to the
memorandum of association of the BCCI and the prevalent rules
and regulations for streamlining the conduct of elections to
different posts/officers in the BCCI including conditions of
eligibility and disqualifications, if any, for candidates wanting
to contest the election for such posts including the office of the
president of the BCCI.
119.2 Amendments to the memorandum of association,
and rules and regulation considered necessary to provide a
mechanism for resolving conflict of interest should such a
conflict arise despite Rule 6.2.4 prohibiting creation or holding
of any commercial interest by the administrators, with
Page 56 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
particular reference to persons, who by virtue of their
proficiency in the game of Cricket, were to necessarily play some
role as Coaches, Managers, Commentators etc.
119.3 Amendment, if any, to the Memorandum of
Association and the Rules and Regulations of BCCI to carry out
the recommendations of the Probe Committee headed by Justice
Mudgal, subject to such recommendations being found
acceptable by the newly appointed Committee.
119.4 Any other recommendation with or without suitable
amendment of the relevant Rules and Regulations, which the
Committee may consider necessary to make with a view to
preventing sporting frauds, conflict of interests, streamlining the
working of BCCI to make it more responsive to the expectations
of the public at large and to bring transparency in practices and
procedures followed by BCCI.”
th
[19.4] By its report dated 18 December 2015, the
Committee recommended several measures and steps which, in its
opinion, would streamline the functioning of the BCCI and prevent
the recurrence of aberrations or controversies in which it had been
embroiled in the past. Upon receipt of the said report, the BCCI
submitted its response to the recommendations made therein.
Page 57 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
Several other organisations and individuals also intervened in the
proceedings and filed their responses and objections to the report
and the recommendations contained therein by raising various
issues.
The Committee also recommended revision of the
Memorandum of Association. In the course of its report, the
Committee identified several structural and governance-related
issues under different heads and suggested appropriate measures to
address the same. These aspects came to be noticed by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in paragraph 18 at page 560 of its judgment dated
th
18 July 2016 reported in (2016) 8 SCC 535 . The issues so
identified included: (i) concentration of power; (ii) lack of
competence; (iii) overlap of diverse functions; (iv) zonal
considerations; (v) absence of representation to players; (vi)
absence of representation to women; (vii) lack of an independent
voice; (viii) unlimited terms and tenures; and (ix) absence of
disqualifications. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in paragraph 18 at
th
page 560 of its decision dated 18 July 2016 reported in (2016) 8
SCC 535 , reproduced the observations made by the Committee on
Page 58 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
the aforesaid aspects, which read as under:
“18. The Committee then identifies the problems under
different headings and suggests solutions for the same in the
following words:
(a) Concentration of power
From overall superintendence of the Board and its affairs to
taking action against players and even approving the
composition of the team chosen by the Selectors, the President is
all-powerful. In practice, this power was even abused with the
exercise of veto over the changes in captaincy and selection of
ICC representatives. Incumbents were also known to turn a
blind eye when issues of corruption and mismanagement were
brought to their notice, even going as far as permitting
retrospective amendments to the bye-laws to favour particular
interests.
(b) Lack of competence
The running of an organisation like the BCCI requires a clear
functioning structure with well defined ideas to be executed. The
present Working Committee of the BCCI consisting of the
various office bearers elected by the BCCI and other
representatives of the Members do not have any managerial
Page 59 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
expertise and requisite experience to run BCCI in a professional
manner. Specialists and professionals are usually engaged in an
ad-hoc manner without any terms and tenures as would be
expected with any billion dollar entity.
(c) Overlap of diverse functions
To borrow an analogy from political governance, it is necessary
that the making of laws and regulations (legislative functions)
are divorced from implementation thereof (executive functions)
and those that review their validity or implementation (judicial
functions). As far as the BCCI is concerned, the Working
Committee not only lays down the relevant rules, regulations
and bye-laws that govern the BCCI, but also oversee their
implementation and takes final decisions when a Member or
third party challenges either the rule or the manner of its
implementation. These overlaps provide for extremely
complicated and messy functioning.
(d) Zonal considerations
There seems to be no rational basis for the Presidency to be
rotated as per Zones, which has the effect of forsaking merit. A
person who has the support of as few as two or three members
in his Zone may end up as the President, if it is the turn of that
Zone for election of President. Recent amendments to the rules
Page 60 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
have permitted individuals who are not even from the zone in
question to be nominated to the post. For the same reason, the
Vice-Presidents who are elected from each of the five zones seem
to be merely ornamental without any specific functions.
(e) No representation to players
It is only by accident that players are elected to the Working
Committee of the BCCI. Their views are, more often than not,
ignored, and the lack of an assured position at the governance
table leaves the players gravely hamstrung. With arbitrary
contracts and salaries that are dwarfed by those playing for
franchises, it is full credit to the national players that they
continue with enthusiasm and patriotic fervour to do their best
for the country when they have no say in the affairs of the very
body towards which they are the primary contributors.
(f) No representation to women
The BCCI has never seen a woman in the Working Committee,
and for a body that runs the sport in the country, the BCCI
ought to have bestowed greater attention to the women’s game.
Australia, New Zealand, England and even Pakistan are seen to
regularly play the women’s game with only governance apathy
responsible for the Indian women’s team playing few and far
between in all forms of the game. Greater support and
Page 61 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
promotion is required so that youngsters may also be attracted
to it.
(g) No independent voice
The BCCI has not embraced the modern principles of open
governance, which is all the more necessary when discharging
such far reaching public functions. The Working Committee
consists entirely of representatives of the Full Members, thereby
making it’s functioning a closed-door affair with no
representation of players or audit experts to act as checks on
governance.
(h) Unlimited terms and tenures
Many individuals occupy various posts in the BCCI for multiple
terms and on multiple occasions, without any ceiling limit.
There has even been an instance of a former President later
becoming the Treasurer.
(i) No disqualifications
There appears to be no ground on which an office bearer has to
demit office. No principles of conflict of interest, of age, of
conviction by a criminal court or of holding an office under the
Government has been laid down to disqualify an office bearer.
Page 62 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
Solutions
The governance of the BCCI must be decentralised. No
individual is more important than the institution, and so all
crucial powers and functions hitherto bestowed exclusively on
the President will have to be divided across the governing body,
which is to be known as the Apex Council (with a special and
separate governing body for IPL, known as IPL Governing
Council).
The issue of competence regarding those managing the
game has to be addressed by bringing in professional managers
and area experts, a theme which is discussed in detail in
Chapter three.
As the zonal rotation policy is without any rational basis, and
as it has been decided to keep the State as the unit to become a
Full Member, it is consistent to have a president who is elected
from among the Full Members, so that the best and most
competent person is selected. The provision for five Vice-
Presidents is detrimental to efficiency and efficacy and so only
one Vice-President shall be elected to the Apex Council in the
same manner as the Secretary, Joint Secretary and Treasurer.
The Apex Council should have a fair mix of elected
representatives and independent members. It is recommended
Page 63 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
that it shall be a nine-member body. The five elected Office
Bearers of BCCI (President, Vice-President, Secretary, Joint
Secretary and Treasurer) shall be the members of the Apex
Council. In addition, the Apex Council shall have four other
‘Councillors’ – two (one male, one female) to be nominated by
the Players’ Association which is to be formed, one to be elected
by the Full Members of BCCI from amongst themselves and one
to be nominated by the Comptroller & Auditor General of India.
These measures address the following concerns:
(a) Transparency is brought in, and independent voices
are heard in the governance of the BCCI for the first time;
(b)
The public are the primary stakeholders in the game
while its players form its very core. Their involvement
through these representatives is most deserving and long
awaited.
(c) As women are nearly half the population of the country,
the anomalous fact that they do not have a voice in the
governance of the sport that has a ‘billion hearts’ beating
for it is now rectified.
(d) The nominee of the C&AG also brings financial and
audit experience which would bring in much required
oversight into monitoring the finances of the BCCI.
Page 64 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
(e) It continues to ensure a strong say for the Full Members,
as it provides that two-thirds’ strength on the Council is
made up of their representatives.
In order to ensure that the posts are not treated as
permanent positions of power, each term should be for three
years. The total period for which a person can be a member of
the Apex Council shall be nine years regardless of the capacity in
which such position was or is occupied. However, in order to
ensure that there is an appropriate cooling-off period, no person
shall be a member of the Apex Council for two consecutive
terms. Any elected Councillor shall stand automatically
disqualified after nine years as an office bearer, and shall also
be disqualified from contesting or holding the post if he has
completed the age of 70 years, is charged under the penal law,
is declared to be of unsound mind, is a Minister or government
servant or holds any post of another sports body in the country.
Any nominated Councillor however, would not have more than
one term in office. The endeavour in this regard is to filter those
who are able and enthusiastic to govern the game that is the
national passion.”
[19.5] The Committee, in Chapter VII, has considered
the need for Ombudsman, Ethics and Electoral Officer. The Hon’ble
Page 65 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
th
Supreme Court, vide its judgment dated 18 July 2016 reported in
(2016) 8 SCC 535, in para 24, observed as under:
“24. In Chapter Seven, the Committee has dealt with need for
Ombudsman, Ethics and Electoral Officer. The Committee notes
that several disputes that exist within the BCCI are born out of
years of apathy in governance and gross mismanagement. The
Committee has found that the relationship between the
Associations, on the one hand, and the BCCI, on the other, has
rarely been equitable and balanced, with the latter exercising its
hegemony over the former. The Committee has therefore
recommended moderation of such relationship in an objective
manner. The Committee has referred to the problems of
disgruntlement and litigation in the States of Bihar, Rajasthan,
Delhi and Jammu and Kashmir. The Committee has found that
absence of suitable dispute resolution mechanism has
compounded the situation. Even the arbitration system that has
hitherto existed has been found to be insufficient and palpably
inappropriate when two unequals are pitted against each other,
especially with the State associations remaining beholden to the
Board for matches, grants and revenues. In order to reduce the
judicial role and the burdening of the courts and to expedite
dispute resolution, the Committee has recommended the
appointment of a retired Judge of the Supreme Court or a
former Chief Justice of a High Court as the Ombudsman of the
Page 66 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
BCCI, to be appointed once a year at the Annual General
Meeting to investigate any complaint received by him/her or suo
motu and to resolve any dispute between the Board and any of
the above entities or among themselves by following the
principles of natural justice, production of evidence and fair
hearing. So also the Committee has recommended an Ethics
Officer for monitoring adherence to the principles governing
avoidance of Conflict of Interest. The Committee has
recommended that Ethics Officer shall have powers inter alia of
laying down of additional guidelines or bye-laws on ethics,
initiation of investigation or adjudicatory proceedings and the
award of warnings, fines, reprimands, suspensions or other
action as may be recommended to the BCCI. According to the
recommendation all non-IPL ethics issues shall be administered
and adjudicated by the Ethics Officer who shall be a former
Judge of the High Court to be appointed by the Board.
Recommendation for appointment of an Electoral Officer for
conducting elections of the Committee under the Rules has also
been made by the Committee. The Committee has recommended
that in order to ensure competence and to distance the entity
from any suspicion or bias, a former Election Commissioner for
India could be appointed as the Electoral Officer for the BCCI,
whose decision on any subject relating to elections shall be final
and conclusive.”
Page 67 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
[19.6] The Committee, in Chapter X of its report,
identified several other areas requiring reform. The issues so
identified were elaborated under various heads, namely
“Membership and Privileges”, “Post and Tenures”, “Voting”,
“Compliance”, “Expenditure and Infrastructure”, “Lack of
Professionalism”, “Dual Posts”, “Interference in Selection” and
“Transparency”. The Committee further recommended that the
electoral process ought to be transparent and independent and, for
that purpose, an Electoral Officer being a retired Central Election
Commissioner or a retired State Election Commissioner should be
appointed. It was suggested that the Electoral Officer would be
responsible for conducting and supervising the entire election
process, commencing from the filing of nominations up to the
declaration of results, including the adjudication of any disputes or
objections arising during the course of the election. Rule 33 of the
Baroda Cricket Association is a consequence of the said
recommendation made by the Committee and accepted by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court.
Page 68 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
[19.7] The reforms recommended by the Committee
were ultimately summarised under the heading “End of the
Innings”. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in sub-paragraphs 3, 4 and 5
th
of paragraph 35 of its judgment dated 18 July 2016, reported in
(2016) 8 SCC 535 , took note of the relevant reforms
recommended by the Committee, which are reproduced as under:
“3. State Associations
“State Associations - Uniformity in Structure’”
The Associations that are the Members would necessarily have
to restrict the tenures of office bearers and prescribe
disqualifications, do away with proxy voting, provide
transparency in functioning, be open to scrutiny and audit by
the BCCI and include players in membership and management.
They would also have to abide by the conflict of interest policy
prescribed by the Board, and divorce the Association from the
social club, if any.
4. Office Bearer
“Limited Tenures & Cooling Off’”
While all the existing office bearers (President, Vice-President,
Page 69 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
Secretary, Treasurer and Joint Secretary) are retained in
honorary positions, the number of Vice Presidents is pruned
from five to one. Their duties have been realigned. The President
is shorn of his say in selections. The additional vote for the
President at meetings is deleted. The terms of these Office
Bearers continue to be of 3 years, but with a maximum of 3
such terms regardless of the post held, with a cooling off period
after each such term.
5. Governance
“Governance separated from management”
The 14 member Working Committee is replaced by a 9 member
Apex Council (with one-third independent members) consisting
of the Office Bearers of the BCCI, an elected representative of the
General Body, two representatives of the Players Association
(one man and one woman) and one nominee from the C&AG’s
office. Terms of eligibility and disqualification are specified with
a bar on Ministers and government servants.”
[19.8] The Hon’ble Supreme Court considered and
accepted the recommendations made by the Committee, which,
inter alia, proposed a cap on the number of terms for which an
Office Bearer could serve and the maximum period for which an
Page 70 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
individual could remain a member of the Apex Council. The
Hon’ble Supreme Court also examined the recommendation
providing for a cooling-off period between two successive terms.
While considering the same, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in
th
paragraph 100 at page 602 of its judgment dated 18 July 2016,
reported in (2016) 8 SCC 535 , observed as under:
“100. We may, in conclusion, deal with two other
recommendations which have also come under criticism by the
BCCI and the intervening associations. The first of these
recommendations proposes a cap on the number of terms for
which an officer bearer can serve and the optimum period for
which one can be a member of the apex council. The
recommendation also provides for cooling off period between
two terms. It also prescribes grounds for disqualification of
office bearer which were otherwise absent in the existing rules
and regulations of the BCCI. These recommendations come in
the wake of a finding by the Committee that under the present
dispensation office bearers could continue for any number of
terms. It was also noticed that no grounds for disqualifying an
office bearers were prescribed. The Committee found both of
these to be unacceptable and, in our opinion, rightly so. Given
the problems that often arise on account of individuals holding
office for any number of consecutive terms, the Committee was
Page 71 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
in our opinion, justified in recommending the length of a term
in office. A three year term recommended by the Committee is,
in our opinion, reasonable. So also, the prescription of cooling
off period between two terms cannot be faulted. Similarly, an
optimum period of 9 years as a member of the apex council
cannot also be termed as unreasonable. Grounds for
disqualification like unsoundness of mind, the member
becoming a minister or holding a membership in any sporting
body also meet the requirement of reasonableness and do not
call for interference from the court. The contention that the
recommendations have no rationale or that the same are
contrary to the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Societies
Registration Act deserve notice only to be rejected.”
[19.9] The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in its decision dated
th
18 July 2016 reported in (2016) 8 SCC 535 , while accepting the
report submitted by the Committee and recommendations made
therein, with such modifications and clarifications, given further
task to the Committee to oversee the implementation of the
decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
[19.10] The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in para 18 at page 344 of
nd
its decision dated 2 January 2017 reported in (2017) 2 SCC 333,
Page 72 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
accepted the recommendations of the Committee with respect to
the disqualification for being an Office Bearer of the BCCI and of
the State Associations. The same reads as under:
“18. Among the recommendations of the Committee that have
been accepted by this Court are the following disqualifications
for being an office bearer of BCCI and of the State Associations :
“A person shall be disqualified from being an Office Bearer if he
or she :
(a) is not a citizen of India;
(b) has attained the age of 70 years;
(c) is declared to be insolvent, or of unsound mind;
(d) is a Minister or Government Servant;
(e) holds any office or post in a sports or athletic
association or federation apart from cricket;
(f) has been an Office Bearer of the BCCI for a cumulative
period of 9 years;
(g) has been charged by a Court of Law for having
committed any criminal offence.”
Page 73 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
[19.11] It was brought to the notice of the Hon’ble Supreme
th
Court by the Committee, through its report dated 14 November
2016, that several Office Bearers of the BCCI and the State
Associations continued to hold their respective posts despite having
incurred disqualification in terms of the norms accepted by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court. The attention of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court was drawn to the fact that individuals having a vested
interest in continuing in office, notwithstanding the prescribed
norms, had ensured that the writ of the Court was obstructed and
impeded. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in turn, strongly deprecated
such conduct and emphasized that the turf of the cricket field
cannot be treated as a personal domain or fiefdom. Accordingly,
the Hon’ble Supreme Court directed that no person shall thereafter
continue to hold, or be entitled to appointment as, an Office Bearer
of the BCCI or any State Association in breach of the prescribed
norms. The Hon’ble Supreme Court further directed that all existing
Office Bearers of the BCCI and the State Associations who did not
satisfy the said norms would stand disqualified with effect from the
date of the order.
Page 74 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
[19.12] Thereafter, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in its
th
judgment dated 9 August 2018 reported in (2018) 9 SCC 624 ,
while considering the recommendations of the Lodha Committee
relating to the concept and necessity of a cooling-off period,
observed in paragraphs 26 to 38 at page 641 as under:
“C. Cooling Off Period
26. The Lodha Committee recommended that:
26.1 The tenure of each term for office bearers of the BCCI and
state associations should be three years;
26.2 A maximum of three terms should be allowed
regardless of the post held; and
26.3 There should be a mandatory ‘cooling off period’
after each term.
27. In making these recommendations, the Committee
has been guided by the need to ensure that vested interests do
not emerge out of the indefinite continuation in office of one or
more individuals. These recommendations seek to enforce a rule
against self-perpetuation by stipulating the period of each term
of office, the number of terms which a single individual may
Page 75 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
hold and the requirement of a break between successive terms.
The recommendations can be construed as an effort to ensure a
dispersal of authority so that control over BCCI and the state
associations is not concentrated in the hands of one or a limited
group of persons. The proposals for setting limits on tenures and
terms were incorporated in a section which the Committee
describes as the “end of the innings”.
28. In the principal judgment of this Court, the
recommendations of the Lodha Committee have been accepted
for the following reasons:
“100…These recommendations come in the wake of a
finding by the Committee that under the present
dispensation office bearers could continue for any number
of terms. The Committee found both of these to be
unacceptable and in our opinion rightly so.... Given the
problems that often arise on account of the individuals
holding the office for any number of consecutive terms,
the Committee was, in our opinion, justified in
recommending the length of a term in office ... The three
years recommended by the Committee is, in our opinion,
reasonable. Similarly, the prescription of cooling off
period between two terms cannot be faulted .... Similarly,
an optimum period of 9 years as a member of the Apex
Council cannot be termed as unreasonable.....” (Emphasis
supplied).
29. The recommendations of the Lodha Committee, as
adopted by this Court, have been clarified in two orders dated
20 January 2017 and 24 March 2017. The clarification by this
Page 76 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
Court is that when an office bearer who completes nine years in
any post in the BCCI is disqualified to become an office bearer of
the BCCI again. A similar disqualification attaches to a person
who has held any post of an office bearer, in a state association
for nine years. For the sake of clarity, what is indicated in the
order dated 24 March 2017 reads thus :
“36…What has been meant by the clarificatory order is
that, if an office bearer has completed nine years in any
post in the B.C.C.I., he shall stand disqualified to become
an office bearer of the B.C.C.I. Similarly, if a person holds
the post of office bearer in any capacity for any State
Association for nine years, he shall stand disqualified for
contesting or holding any post or office of the State
Association. To avoid any kind of maze, we proceed to
state by giving an example. If a person has held the post
of office bearer in respect of a State Association for a
period of nine years, he will not be disqualified to contest
for the post of office bearer of the B.C.C.I.” (Emphasis
supplied)
30. A considerable amount of fire has been directed against
the provision for a cooling off period. Essentially, the cooling off
period stipulates that an office bearer is not eligible to contest a
succeeding election. The recommendation has been criticised on
the ground that an individual who has acquired experience in
working in a particular post for three years is unable to utilise
the experience gained (as a result of a cooling off period of three
years) which would be a loss to the game of cricket. “Continuity
Page 77 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
of service”, it has been submitted, subserves the interest of the
game and a person who has “enriched himself” over a period of
three years should be allowed to contribute even thereafter
without a break. This, it has been submitted, would enable
office bearers to develop their networks with other cricketing
nations and the ICC. Moreover, since an upper age limit of
seventy years is in place, it has been submitted that the
requirement of a cooling off period may be dispensed with. The
nature of cricket, it has been urged, is rapidly evolving and an
endeavour must be made to ensure that individuals with
requisite experience are able to contribute to the game.
31. While dealing with the objections to a cooling off
period, it is necessary at the outset to emphasise that the term of
an office bearer cannot be regarded either as an opportunity “to
enrich himself” or as a matter involving “continuity of service”.
The expression “enriched himself” may have a legitimate
connotation if it adverts only to experience gained. Otherwise,
enrichment in the form of personal aggrandisement is precisely
what was frowned upon by the Lodha Committee, and for
justifiable reasons. The position of an office bearer in the state
associations and in the BCCI is not a matter of ‘service’ in the
conventional sense. Office bearers should not construe their
position as employees with a vested right to a particular tenure
of service. Undoubtedly, the submission that individuals must
continue for a period which enables them to develop experience
Page 78 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
in the administration of the game cannot be discounted.
Equally, it is a matter of concern that vested interests and
conflicts of interest develop around power centres which have
unbridled authority. Dispersal of authority is a necessary
safeguard to ensure against the perpetuation of power centres.
Individuals who administer the game of cricket must realise that
the game is perched far above their personal interests.
Important as experience in administration is, it is far-fetched to
assume – and far more difficult for the court to accept – that
experience rests on the shoulders of a closed group of a few
individuals. In fact, opportunities to a wide body of talent
encourage a dispersal of experience and democratisation of
authority.
32. Understood from the above perspective, the
requirements that the term of office of an office bearer should be
three years; and that an individual should not hold office in the
BCCI for a period excess of nine years (regardless of the post
held) with a similar stipulation of nine years for the state
associations is manifestly in public interest. Both the
stipulations are valuable safeguards to ensure against the
concentration of power.
33. The requirement of a cooling off period of three
years at the end of every term in office, however, requires
careful consideration. The argument against the imposition of
Page 79 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
such a requirement is that by requiring an office bearer who has
held a post for three years to undergo a break of three years
prevents office bearers from applying their knowledge and
experience in regard to the administration of the game of
cricket. The submission which has urged before the Court is that
once there is a cap of a nine year tenure for BCCI, with a
similar tenure of nine years for the state associations, an
additional cooling off period of three years at the end of every
term of office may not be necessary.
34. The amicus has earnestly supported the cooling off
requirement as being necessary, having regard to the spirit of
the Lodha Committee recommendations. A cooling off period, it
has been urged is necessary to ensure that after a period of three
years, a person is not able to migrate to another association and
occupy the position of an office bearer or to occupy any other
position in the same association. The amicus also submits that
the expression ‘office bearer’ should not be allowed to be
circumvented by being a member of any other committee.
Subject to these safeguards, the amicus agrees that a person
may be able to serve for a period of nine years in the BCCI and
nine years in a state association.
35. Having carefully evaluated the submissions which
have been urged before us, we are of the view that a cooling off
period should be observed. A cooling off period has several
Page 80 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
features which are of utmost importance :
(i) it is a safeguard against the development of vested
personal interests;
(ii) it ensures against the concentration of power in a few
hands;
(iii) it facilitates a dispersal of authority; and
(iv) it encourages the generation of a wider body of
experienced administrators.
Cooling off must be accepted as a means to prevent a few
individuals from regarding the administration of cricket as a
personal turf. The game will be better off without cricketing
oligopolies.
36. However, in our view, it would be appropriate to
direct that a cooling off period of three years would apply after
an individual holds two successive terms in office either in the
BCCI, or in any state association or a combination of the two.
For instance, if an office bearer has held office for two
consecutive terms in any post in a state association, such an
individual must face a cooling off period of three years.
Likewise, if an individual has held any post as an office bearer
of the BCCI for a total period of six years in succession, the
Page 81 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
individual must have a cooling off period of three years before
seeking election again either to the BCCI or to a state
association. The cooling off period would apply also in a
situation where an individual holds a post for one term in a
state association followed by a post in the BCCI successively or
vice versa. This would ensure that after a period of six years
involving two consecutive terms, a cooling off period would be
attracted. Allowing an individual to act as an office bearer for
six years in continuation, is a sufficiently long period for
experience and knowledge gained to be deployed in the interest
of the game without at the same time resulting in a monopoly
of power.
37. The cooling off period shall read as follows :
“An office bearer who has held any post for two
consecutive terms either in a state association or in the
BCCI (or a combination of both) shall not be eligible to
contest any further election without completing a cooling
off period of three years. During the cooling off period,
such an office bearer shall not be a member of the
governing council or of any committee whatsoever of the
BCCI or of a state association.”
The above principle shall govern Clause 6(4) as well as Clause
14(4) of the draft constitution. The above principle will ensure
Page 82 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
that the cooling off period will come into operation upon a
person holding any post for two consecutive terms not exceeding
six years.”
38. We accordingly clarify that the position as approved by
the Court in the present order shall be to the following effect:
38.1 The term for all posts of office bearers in BCCI and in
state associations shall be three years;
38.2 No person shall hold the position of an office bearer in
any state association, regardless of post, for a period in excess of
nine years in the aggregate;
38.3 No person shall hold the post of office bearer in BCCI,
regardless of post, for a period in excess of nine years in the
aggregate;
38.4 There shall be a cooling off period of three years after an
individual has held the post of an office bearer for two
consecutive terms either in a state association or in the BCCI or
a combination of both; and
38.5 The expression ‘office bearer’ should not be permitted to
be circumvented by being a member of any other committee or
of the Governing Council in BCCI or any state association, as
the case may be.”
Page 83 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
[19.13] Thus, while accepting the recommendations of
the Lodha Committee with regard to the introduction of a cooling-
th
off period, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in its judgment dated 9
August 2018 reported in (2018) 9 SCC 624 , observed that such a
provision serves several important purposes, namely: (i) it acts as
a safeguard against the development of vested personal
interests; (ii) it prevents the concentration of power in a few
hands; (iii) it facilitates the dispersal of authority; and (iv) it
encourages the emergence of a wider body of experienced
administrators. The Hon’ble Supreme Court further observed
that the concept of cooling-off must be accepted as a
mechanism to prevent a few individuals from treating the
administration of cricket as their personal domain,
emphasizing that the sport would be better served in the
absence of cricketing oligopolies.
[19.14] While accepting the report of the Lodha
Committee concerning the constitution of the Apex Council and the
proposed disqualifications, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in
Page 84 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
th
paragraphs 39 to 43 of its judgment dated 9 August 2018 reported
in (2018) 9 SCC 624 , observed as under:
“D. Division of Functions, Professional Management and
Disqualifications
39. The report of the Lodha Committee postulates that
the General body of the BCCI would consist of full members and
associate members. The report provides for an Apex Council
which is responsible for the administration of the Board.
40. This functional distinction between the General body and
the Apex Council is an institutional safeguard to ensure
professional management of BCCI. The Apex Council is
entrusted with the function of professional management
through the Chief Executive Officer, the Chief Financial Officer
and other officers who must be recruited on a transparent and
professional basis. Of the nine members of the Apex Council, five
(the President, Vice President, Secretary, Joint Secretary,
Treasurer and a member) are to be elected by the General body.
41. We approve clause 15 (1) in regard to the Apex Council
which reads thus:
“The affairs of BCCI shall be governed by the Apex Council
Page 85 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
and its framework of governance shall:
(i) Enable strategic guidance of the entity;
(ii) Ensure efficient monitoring of management;
(iii) Ensure the performance of the respective roles,
responsibilities and powers of the CEO, Managers,
Cricket Committees and Standing Committees except
the Governing Council; and
(iv) Ensure a distribution and balance of authority so that
no single individual has unfettered powers.”
E. Disqualifications
42. In regard to disqualifications, we accept the clause in the
draft constitution as proposed with the incidental modifications
as suggested by the amicus. The disqualifications read as
follows:
“ Clause 6 (5) - A person shall be disqualified from being
an Office Bearer, a member of the Governing Council or
any Committee or a representative to the International
Cricket Council or any similar organization if he or she:
(a) is not a citizen of India;
(b) has attained the age of 70 years;
Page 86 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
(c) is declared to be insolvent, or of unsound mind;
(d) is a Minister or Government Servant or holds a public
office;
(e) holds any office or post in a sports or athletic
association or federation apart from cricket;
(f) has been an Office Bearer of the BCCI for a cumulative
period of 9 years or of a State association for a
cumulative period of 9 years;
(g) has been charged by a Court of Law for having
committed any criminal offence i.e. an order framing
charges has been passed by a court of law having
competent jurisdiction.”
43. Clauses 29, 33(1), 33(2) and 45 of the draft
constitution with the modifications suggested by the amicus
read as follows :
“Clause 29. INADVERTENT OMISSION TO GIVE NOTICE
OF MEETING - Inadvertent omission to give notice of an
Annual General or Special General Meeting or Meetings of
the Apex Council or of any of the Committees to any
member entitled thereto or the non-receipt thereof by such
individual shall not invalidate the proceedings of such
Page 87 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
meetings.
Clause 33(1). - At least four weeks prior to the Annual
General Meeting at which an election is to be held, the
Apex Council shall appoint an Electoral Officer, who shall
be a former member of the Election Commission of India.
Clause 33(2). - The Electoral Officer shall oversee and
supervise the entire election process including scrutiny of
the electoral rolls for Councillors and the Players’ Cricket
Association, which shall include all nominations and
candidatures being subject to his scrutiny in accordance
with the Rules.
Clause 45. - These Rules and Regulations of the BCCI shall
not be repealed, added to, amended or altered except
when passed and adopted by a 3/4th majority of the
members present and entitled to vote at a Special General
Meeting of the General Body convened for the purpose or
at the Annual General Meeting. Any such amendment will
not be given effect to without the leave of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court.”
[19.15] The Hon’ble Supreme Court further directed that once
the draft Constitution, as proposed, stood approved, no amendment
thereto shall be given effect to without obtaining prior leave of the
Page 88 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
Hon’ble Supreme Court.
[19.16] Thereafter, the Hon’ble Supreme Court considered
various suggestions, amendments and modifications in its judgment
th
dated 14 September 2022 passed in I.A. No. 49930 of 2020 in
Civil Appeal No. 4235 of 2014. The directions issued by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the said judgment constitute the basis for the
present Memorandum of Association and the Rules and Regulations
of the Baroda Cricket Association, which are the outcome of the
final order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in I.A. No. 49930
of 2020 in Civil Appeal No. 4235 of 2014.
[20] In the present case, Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 have
cumulatively completed nine years on different posts, either as
“Office Bearers” / member of the Apex Council / member of the
Managing Committee in the Apex Council. The particulars thereof,
for the sake of brevity, are reproduced hereunder in a tabular form:
Name Office Bearer Member of Managing
Total
Years
Committee / Apex
Council
Page 89 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
No. of
Years No. of
Years
Years
Years
Mr. Kiran
7 2000-01 to
2 1998-99 to
9
S. More
2006-07
1999-2000
Mr. Amul
6 2013-14 to
8 2005-06 to
14
V. Jikar
2018-19
2012-13
Mr.
3 2022 to
12 2001-02 to
15
Anant V.
2025
2012-13
Indulkar
Mr. Amar
3 2016-17 to
15 2001-02 to
18
M.
2018-19
2004-05;
Petiwale
2007-08 to
2010-11;
2013-14 to
2015-16 and
2019-20 to
2022-23
[21] Notwithstanding the aforesaid specific provisions
relating to the cooling-off period and the consequent
disqualification, Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 submitted nomination
forms for various posts as “Office Bearers”. The said nominations
were specifically objected to before the Electoral Officer – BCA by
th
way of objections dated 20 January 2026, inter alia , on the
Page 90 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
ground that the said respondents had completed more than nine
years in office either as “Office Bearers” or as members of the Apex
Council of the BCA and, therefore, had incurred disqualification
under the Rules and Regulations as well as under the various
directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.
4235 of 2014.
Although the Electoral Officer – BCA received the said
detailed objections on 22nd January 2026, the Electoral Officer,
without adjudicating upon or disposing of the same, proceeded to
publish the final list of candidates for the BCA election for the term
2026–2029, which included the names of Respondent Nos. 4 to 7.
 CONDUCT OF THE ELECTORAL OFFICER:
[22] At the outset, it is pertinent to note that the post of
Electoral Officer was created pursuant to the report submitted by
the Justice Lodha Committee and the recommendations made
therein, which were subsequently accepted by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court. As noted hereinabove, the Committee, in Chapter X of its
Page 91 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
report, proposed various measures to ensure transparency and
independence in the electoral process and recommended the
appointment of an Electoral Officer, preferably a retired Central or
State Election Commissioner, for that purpose.
Accordingly, the Electoral Officer was envisaged as an
authority responsible for conducting and supervising the entire
election process, commencing from the filing of nominations up to
the declaration of results, including the resolution of disputes and
objections arising in the course of the election. These
recommendations having been accepted by the Hon’ble Supreme
Court, the office of the Electoral Officer came to be incorporated in
the governance framework.
Rule 33 of the Rules and Regulations of the BCA casts a duty
upon the Apex Council to appoint an Electoral Officer who shall be
a former member of the State Election Commission. Rule 33(2)
provides that the Electoral Officer so appointed shall oversee and
supervise the entire election process, including the scrutiny of
electoral rolls of the Councillors and the players’ Cricket
Page 92 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
Association, and that all nominations and candidatures shall be
subject to his scrutiny in accordance with the Rules. Rule 33(3)
further imposes a statutory obligation upon the Electoral Officer to
decide any dispute or objection pertaining to nominations and
candidatures, and such decision is declared to be final and
conclusive.
Thus, statutory duty is cast upon the Electoral Officer to
oversee and supervise the entire election process, including
adjudication upon objections relating to nominations and
candidatures in accordance with the Rules. Therefore, when
detailed objections were raised before the Electoral Officer with
respect to the nominations of Respondent Nos. 4 to 7, specifically
pointing out that they had incurred disqualification and were
therefore ineligible to contest the election, their nominations were
liable to be rejected.
In such circumstances, it was the bounden duty of the
Electoral Officer to decide the disputes and objections relating to
the nomination and candidature of Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 and to
Page 93 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
communicate such decision after granting an opportunity of
hearing to the concerned parties. However, in the present case, by
failing to decide the objections and/or disputes raised through the
th
application dated 20 January 2026, the Electoral Officer, who is a
former member of the State Election Commission, has failed to
discharge the statutory duty cast upon him.
While exercising powers under Rule 33, it was incumbent
upon the Electoral Officer to ensure that all nominations and
candidatures were in strict conformity with the Rules. The
Committee, in its report and recommendations, which were
subsequently accepted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, had
envisaged the appointment of a former Election Commissioner as
Electoral Officer with the expectation that such authority would
discharge his functions independently, fairly, and without fear or
favour.
However, in the present case, by failing to adjudicate upon
the objections and disputes relating to the nominations and
candidatures of Respondent Nos. 4 to 7, the Electoral Officer has
Page 94 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
neither acted independently nor fairly, and has failed to adhere to
the very object and purpose for which the office of the Electoral
Officer was created.
During the course of arguments or rather surprising,
submission was advanced by learned Senior Advocate Mr. Shalin
Mehta appearing on behalf of the respondent No.3 – Electoral
Officer to the effect that as such the Electoral Officer did consider
the objections raised with regard to nominations of the
Respondents Nos.4 to 7 in light of the Memorandum of Association
and the Rules applicable to the BCA. However, the Electoral Officer
found that Respondents Nos.4 to 7 had not incurred any
disqualification under any of the provisions of Rules. It was
submitted, however, the entire exercise undertaken by the Electoral
Officer had been kept in a sealed cover and can be produced, if
directed.
Such a stand taken by the Electoral Officer not
communicating any decision on the objections to the objectors and
keeping the same in a sealed cover is as such unknown to the law.
Page 95 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
Even the same can be said to be in violation of the principles of
natural justice. The decision on the objections as to nomination and
candidature is / was required to be communicated to the objectors
so that an aggrieved person can challenge the same before the
Court having jurisdiction and / or can take recourse to law. In the
present case, the objectors / petitioners are neither communicated
any decision on their objections nor they are communicated that
their objections are considered by the Electoral Officer and / or the
same are overruled. Apart from this, even no such decision, if any,
on the objections raised by the petitioners, which is said to have
been kept in a sealed cover, is forthcoming. No such decision, if
any, is placed on record of this Court. Transparency and fairness
required at least, at this stage, to place on record a copy of the
decision without awaiting any direction from the Court, more
particularly, when it is a duty cast upon the Electoral Officer to
supervise the entire election and deal with the objections on
nomination and candidature of any contestants. It was the bounded
duty of the Electoral Officer to deal with the objections raised by
the petitioners with reasons and to communicate the same to the
Page 96 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
objectors / petitioners. By not doing so, the Electoral Officer has
failed to perform its duty fairly and as such it can be said to be in
breach of trust reposed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court while
directing to create post of Electoral Officer by giving wide powers
of supervision right from nomination to declaring the result.
Had the Electoral Officer discharged his statutory duty in
accordance with Rule 33 and adjudicated upon the objections
independently and fairly, the present litigation could well have
been avoided. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the
conduct of the Electoral Officer in failing to decide or dispose of the
objections relating to the nominations and candidatures of
Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 is, therefore, highly deprecated.
 LEGAL ANALYSIS OF RELEVANT RULES AND
REGULATIONS:
[23] Even on merits, upon a conjoint reading of the relevant
Rules and Regulations referred to hereinabove, Respondent Nos. 4
to 7 are found to have incurred disqualification from contesting the
Page 97 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
election for the post of “Office Bearer”. It cannot be disputed that,
as per Rule 1(c), the “Apex Council” constitutes the principal
governing body of the Baroda Cricket Association and is entrusted
with the governance of its affairs, as provided under Rule 14.
In terms of Rule 14, there shall be an Apex Council of the
BCA, which shall be primarily responsible for the governance and
management of the affairs of the Association. At this juncture, it
would also be apposite to consider Rule 15, which delineates the
powers and functions of the Apex Council. For the sake of brevity,
Rule 15 is reproduced hereinbelow:
“15. POWER AND FUNCTIONS OF THE APEX COUNCIL
1. The affairs of BCA shall be governed by the Apex Council and
its framework of governance shall
i. Enable strategic guidance of the entity:
iii. Ensure efficient monitoring of management;
iv. Ensure the performance of the respective role,
responsibilities and powers of the CEO, Managers, Cricket
Page 98 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
Committees and Standing Committees, except the
Governing Council: and following Elected Committees viz
1. Ground & Infrastructure committee
2. Finance Committee
3. Press Publicity Committee
iv. Ensure a distribution and balance of authority so that
no single individual has unfettered powers.
2. The Apex Council shall have all the powers of the General
Body and authority and discretion to do all acts and things
expect such acts as by these rules are expressly directed or
required to be done by the General Body. Exercise of such
powers, authorities and discretion shall be subject to the control
and regulation of the General Body. NO regulation shall
retrospectively invalidate any act of the Apex Council which was
otherwise valid.
3. To appoint Electoral officer for BCA
4. To Appoint CEO for BCA
5. To Appoint members of the Cricket Committees, Standing
Committees & Governing Council of BCA
Page 99 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
6. To appoint the BCA Representative or Representatives on the
BCCI and/or similar organizations.
7. The Apex Council shall exercise superintendence over the
CEO, the Cricket Committees and the Standing Committees, in
the discharge of their duties generally, and in particular, in
accordance with any general or special direction of the General
Body, except for the Governing Council of the BPL which is
directly accountable to the General Body.
8. In addition to and without prejudice to generality of powers
conferred directly or by necessary implication under these Rules
and regulations and the Memorandum of Association, the Apex
Council shall exercise the powers and perform the duties
hereafter mentioned:
a. To Control, permit and regulate all aspect regarding
the visits of other state cricket teams to BCA and visit of
BCA teams to other states & foreign countries and to settle
the terms of which such visits shall be conducted.
b. To lay down conditions on which players shall take
part in a tour to any other state or foreign country and by
which such Players shall be governed, including MOU &
terms of payments to such players.
c. To control, expand and regulate the finance of BCA
Page 100 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
d. To institute or defend through the Secretary any action
or proceedings for or against BCA or against any Office
Bearers or employee of the BCA.
e. To mediate in regard to issues between members, failing
resolution of which a reference may be made to the
Ombudsman.
f. To interact and consult with the Cricket Players
Association regarding representation made on their
behalf.
g. to purchase, sell and/or mortgage, exchange and/ or
otherwise disposed of immovable property wherever
situated, in order to promote the object of the BCA.
h. To collect funds and whenever necessary borrow not
exceeding 25% of the general fund with or without
security for purpose of BCA. And to raise loans with or
without security and to purchase, redeem or payoff any
such security.
i. To fill up, till the following Annual General Meeting,
any vacancy occurring of a member of a Committee by a
reason of death or being adjudged insolvent or being of
unsound mind or being convicted of a criminal offence
Page 101 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
involving moral turpitude or by resignation or any other
disqualification.
j. To frame rules and lay down conditions including those
of Travels, accommodation and allowance under which
the BCA players shall take part in cricket
tournaments/matches or exhibition, festival and charity
matches organized by BCA or by a Club under the
authority of BCA in the course of a visit or tour of a
foreign cricket team to Baroda.
k. To frame rule for BCA conducted tournaments of all
formats.
l. To frame rules regarding appointment, service
conditions and disciplinary actions concerning employees
and officers of BCA.
m. To make the Tournament Rule for various domestic
tournaments and exhibition matches involving Members,
Universities and other entities.
n. To frame, in consultation with the CEO, rules for
the appointment of Managers, Secretaries, Administrative
officers, Peons and other service personnel and staff and
for payment to them and other persons in return for their
services rendered to BCA, salaries, wages, gratuities,
Page 102 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
pensions honorariums, compensations, any ex-gratia
payment and/or provident fund and to regulate discipline
by suspending, fining, removing or dismissing such
employees.
9. The Apex Council shall meet at least once in two months at
such time and place and shall conduct proceedings in such
manner as it may from time to time decide
10. A Special Meeting of the Apex Council may be convened at
any time by the President and shall be convened on a requisition
to that effect being made in writing by not less than three
Councilors. Any such requisition shall express the object of the
meeting proposed to be called and shall be sent to the Secretary.
11. Four days’ clear notice of the Meeting of the Apex Council
together with the Agenda shall be given to the Councilors. For a
Special Meeting of the Apex Council convened for the purposes
stated in Sub-Rule (5) above, one days clear notice shall be
given. An emergent meeting of the Apex Council may be
convened with same day notice.
12. Five members of the Apex Council shall from a quorum for
its meetings. The president or in his absence a member elected
by those present at the meeting shall be the Chairperson. In the
event of a tie, the Chairperson shall have a casting vote.
Page 103 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
13. A resolution by circulation by all members of the Apex
Council shall be as valid and effective as if it had been passed at
a meeting of the Apex Council. Such a resolution shall be
ratified at the next meeting of the Apex Council.
14. The Secretary shall keep the minutes of every Meeting in a
book which shall be signed by the Chairperson when approved.”
[24] Thus, having regard to the powers and functions
conferred under Rule 15, the Apex Council plays an important role
in the governance of the Baroda Cricket Association. The Apex
Council comprises thirteen Councillors, of whom five are elected as
“Office Bearers” in accordance with Rule 6, while the remaining
eight are elected in terms of Rule 14(2)(a) to (c). Accordingly, the
Apex Council consists of Councillors, including the elected “Office
Bearers” as provided under Rule 6.
Rule 14(3) prescribes a disqualification provision, whereby a
person shall stand disqualified from being a Councillor if he or she
has served as an Office Bearer of the BCCI for a cumulative period
of nine years or as an Office Bearer of the BCA for a cumulative
period of nine years. It is true that the expression “Office Bearer”
Page 104 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
denotes the President, Vice-President, Secretary, Joint Secretary
and Treasurer. Rule 6(4) further provides for a cooling-off period
of three years and stipulates that an “Office Bearer” who has held
any post for two consecutive terms shall not be eligible to contest
any further election in the BCA without first completing the
prescribed cooling-off period of three years. It is further provided
that during such cooling-off period, the said Office Bearer shall not
be a member of the Governing Council or any committee
whatsoever of the BCA. The Rule further clarifies that the
expression “Office Bearer” shall not be permitted to be
circumvented by serving as a member of any other committee or
the Governing Council, as the case may be.
[25] Rule 6(5) also assumes significance as a disqualification
provision applicable to an “Office Bearer”. The Rule provides that a
person shall stand disqualified from being an Office Bearer, a
member of the Apex Council, the Governing Council or any
Committee, or from acting as a representative to the BCCI, if he or
she has served as an Office Bearer of the BCCI or the BCA for a
cumulative period of nine years.
Page 105 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
It is also required to be noted that, as per Rule 14(4-A), each
elected Councillor shall hold office for a term of three years, subject
to a maximum of three terms on the Apex Council. It is further
stipulated that a Councillor who has held any post for two
consecutive terms in the BCA shall not be eligible to contest any
further election in the BCA without completing a cooling-off period
of three years. During such cooling-off period, the Councillor shall
not be a member of the Governing Council or of any committee
whatsoever of the BCA. It is specifically provided that the
expression “Councillor” shall not be permitted to be circumvented
by serving as a member of any other committee or of the Governing
Council of the BCA.
[26] The object and purpose underlying the prescription of
the cooling-off period and the disqualification upon completion of a
cumulative tenure of nine years have been considered by the
th
Hon’ble Supreme Court. In paragraph 35 of its decision dated 9
August 2018, reported in (2018) 9 SCC 624, the Hon’ble Supreme
Court observed as under:
Page 106 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
“35. Having carefully evaluated the submissions which
have been urged before us, we are of the view that a cooling off
period should be observed. A cooling off period has several
features which are of utmost importance :
(i) it is a safeguard against the development of vested
personal interests;
(ii) it ensures against the concentration of power in a few
hands;
(iii) it facilitates a dispersal of authority; and
(iv) it encourages the generation of a wider body of
experienced administrators.
Cooling-off must be accepted as a means to prevent a few
individuals from regarding the administration of cricket as a
personal turf. The game will be better off without cricketing
oligopolies.”
[27] Therefore, on a conjoint reading of Rule 6 and Rule 14,
it becomes evident that Respondent Nos. 4 to 7, having served as
“Office Bearers” / member of Committee / member of the Apex
Council for a cumulative period of nine years, have incurred the
Page 107 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
disqualification prescribed under the Rules. The contention
advanced on behalf of the contesting respondents that they have
not held the post of “Office Bearer” for a cumulative period of nine
years, and that the tenure served as members of the Apex Council
should not be taken into account while computing the cumulative
period of nine years for the purpose of disqualification, cannot be
accepted. Such an interpretation would defeat the very object and
purpose for which the Hon’ble Supreme Court directed
incorporation of the provisions relating to disqualification and the
cooling-off period.
The underlying object of prescribing disqualification upon
completion of a cumulative period of nine years, coupled with a
cooling-off period, is to ensure that no individual continues to
exercise control over the administration and management of
cricketing bodies for an unduly long period, thereby preventing the
development of vested interests. As noted hereinabove, the Apex
Council is the principal governing body entrusted with the
governance of the affairs of the Association. If the submission
advanced on behalf of the respondents were to be accepted, it
Page 108 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
would imply that only the tenure served as an “Office Bearer” for a
cumulative period of nine years would attract disqualification,
while the tenure served as a “Councillor” would stand excluded.
Such an interpretation would enable a person to circumvent the
disqualification provisions by serving, for instance, as a “Councillor”
for cumulative period of nine years and thereafter, again re-enter in
the Apex Council as a “Councillor” under the garb of “Office
Bearer” for another nine years, which would effectively result
retention of power for total years as 9 + 9 in the Apex Council,
which is not permissible.
Such a construction would clearly frustrate the object and
purpose underlying the provisions relating to disqualification and
the cooling-off period as envisaged by the Hon’ble Supreme Court,
and would render the disqualification provisions contained in Rule
6 and Rule 14 nugatory and otiose. As noted hereinabove, Rule
6(4)(ii) expressly stipulates that the expression “Office Bearer”
shall not be permitted to be circumvented by serving as a member
of any other Committee or the Governing Council of the BCA or the
BCCI, as the case may be. Similar language is employed in Rule
Page 109 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
14(4-A), which specifically provides that the expression
“Councillor” shall not be permitted to be circumvented by
becoming a member of any other Committee or of the Governing
Council of the BCA. Thus, the Rules clearly contemplate that the
provisions relating to disqualification and cooling-off period cannot
be circumvented in any manner.
[28] Even otherwise, it is pertinent to note that in Rule
14(2), the expression used is “Councillor”. The Apex Council is
required to comprise thirteen “Councillors”, of whom five are to be
elected as members in accordance with Rule 6. Rule 14 further
stipulates that a person shall be disqualified from being a
“Councillor” if he or she has served as an “Office Bearer” of the
BCCI for a cumulative period of nine years or as an “Office Bearer”
of the BCA for a cumulative period of nine years. Thus, for all
practical purposes, the elected “Office Bearers” under Rule 6 are
themselves “Councillors”, forming part of the Apex Council, which
constitutes the principal governing body entrusted with the
administration and governance of the Association.
Page 110 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
[29] Therefore, on a conjoint reading of Rules 6 and 14, it
necessarily follows that for the purpose of determining
disqualification, the entire period served either as an “Office
Bearer” or as a member of the Apex Council in the capacity of a
“Councillor”, including service as an elected “Office Bearer” and/or
as a member of any Committee or Governing Council, must be
taken into account while computing the cumulative period of nine
years. Any other interpretation would run contrary to the directions
issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and would undermine the
provisions relating to disqualification and the cooling-off period.
Any other interpretation would permit individuals to continue
in office / power / administration beyond the permissible
cumulative period of nine years by circumventing the provisions of
Rules 6 and 14. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion
that Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 have incurred disqualification from
contesting the election for the post of “Office Bearer”. The Electoral
Officer ought to have rejected the nomination forms submitted by
Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 and should have proceeded to declare them
Page 111 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
disqualified in accordance with law.
[30] In the present case, apart from the fact that the
Electoral Officer failed to discharge the statutory duty cast upon
him under Rule 33 by not adjudicating upon the objections raised
against the nomination and/or candidature of Respondent Nos. 4 to
7, and by not communicating any decision thereon, even on merits
the action of the Electoral Officer in accepting the nomination and
candidature of Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 and including their names in
the final list of candidates is arbitrary, illegal and unsustainable in
law.
Such action is clearly contrary to the provisions of the Rules
and Regulations framed in accordance with law and in compliance
with the directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil
Appeal No. 4235 of 2014. The said action, therefore, deserves to be
quashed and set aside. Consequently, the petitioners are entitled to
the issuance of a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of
mandamus, and are entitled to the reliefs prayed for in the present
petition.
Page 112 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
[31] In view of the foregoing discussion and reasons
recorded hereinabove, the present petition deserves to be allowed
and is accordingly allowed. It is hereby held that Respondent Nos.
4 to 7 have incurred disqualification from contesting the election
for the post of “Office Bearer” of the Baroda Cricket Association
th
scheduled on 15 February 2026 for the term 2026–2029.
Consequently, the action of accepting the nomination forms
of Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 for the post of “Office Bearer”, and the
nd
publication of their names in the final list of candidates dated 22
February 2026 by Respondent No. 3 – the Electoral Officer, is
hereby quashed and set aside. Consequently, election / voting held
th
on 15 February 2026 qua Respondents Nos.4 to 7 is also hereby
quashed and set aside. Necessary consequences shall follow.
Respondent No. 3 – the Electoral Officer is directed to
proceed further with the election process and to declare the results
of the election in accordance with law and in light of the
Page 113 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026

C/SCA/1670/2026 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
observations / findings / directions made hereinabove.
(NIRAL R. MEHTA,J)
FURTHER ORDER
After the pronouncement of the judgment, learned Senior
Advocate Mr. Devang Nanavati for private Respondents Nos.4 to 7,
prayed for extension of interim arrangement made by this Court
th
vide order dated 18 February 2026 passed in Civil Application
No.1 of 2026 in R/Special Civil Application No.1670 of 2026 for a
further period of two weeks for enabling the private respondents to
approach the higher forum.
As against this, learned Senior Advocate Mr. Apurva Vakil for
the petitioners has opposed extension of interim arrangement.
However, in the facts and circumstances of the case so as to
enable the Respondents Nos.4 to 7 to approach the higher forum,
th
interim arrangement made by this Court vide order dated 18
February 2026 is hereby further extended for a further period of
two weeks from today.
(NIRAL R. MEHTA,J)
CHANDRESH
Page 114 of 114
Uploaded by CHANDRESH N. SIDDHAPURA(HC01109) on Mon Mar 16 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 16 21:40:46 IST 2026