BCCI elections set to be delayed after delay in Supreme Court hearing

no photo

After Supreme Court delayed their hearing for the various issues raised by the BCCI, it is now clear that the BCCI elections, which is set for October 22, will be delayed. Several applications are pending before the apex court, most notably on the composition of the apex council.

The Telegraph reported that BCCI's case hadn’t been listed on the Supreme Court’s list for the next day because Justice S.A. Bobde, one of the judges in the case involving the BCCI, is also on the five-member constitutional bench hearing the Ayodhya dispute. The delay in the hearing means the elections will be postponed further after the initial date was scheduled for October 22. 

The Supreme Court-appointed CoA chief Vinod Rai WAS confident of holding the elections after a meeting in New Delhi this week but now the same report suggested that the electoral protocol, which was scheduled to have been completed by June 30, hasn’t yet been communicated to the state associations. The appointment of electoral officers by the state associations also haven’t been completed despite an extended deadline of August 5.

As far as the composition of the apex council goes, P.S. Narasimha, the amicus curiae, had earlier said that while having a BCCI-like nine-member council for the state associations wouldn’t be ‘logical’, it wasn’t in the mandate of the Lodha Commission too. However, the tricky issue that stood on the way of the BCCI is not having uniformity in the number of members in the council which hasn’t clearly gone down well with the associations — 13 for Baroda Cricket Association, nine for Cricket Association of Bengal, 11 for Chhattisgarh State Cricket Sangh, 17 for Mumbai Cricket Association and 19 for Madhya Pradesh Cricket Association.

“The composition of the apex council has to be sorted out. How can it be as discriminatory as nine for one association and 13/19 for another? What is the logic behind having a specific number of persons for a certain association? The amicus curiae doesn’t have the right to decide on the number. The court hasn’t said it has to be 19. So unless the constitution is final, how can Rai say that 26 associations are Lodha complaint?" said the senior Board member.

“There are a significant number of interim applications pending before the apex court. The court will have to first decide on them. The issues are significant and varying — from the composition of the apex council to the cooling-off period to players’ voting rights. Each one of them merits a hearing. If a Union territory like Pondicherry can get a full membership, then why not Andaman or Lakshadweep? Where lies the uniformity?” said another livid Board member.

Get updates! Follow us on

Open all