On Thursday, SC appointed Committee of Administrators (CoA) filed their seventh status report in the Supreme Court where they recommended for the BCCI AGM to elect the new office bearers. It means that all the present BCCI office bearers’ terms are completing.
According to the existing constitution, the present office bearers’ tenure had ended on 1st March 2018 as they were elected in 2015 in the 85th AGM where Jagmohan Dalmiya was elected as the President. According to the rule 15 (i) of existing BCCI constitution, “The election of Office Bearers and vice-presidents shall be held at the AGM of the Board every year. The office bearers and vice president so elected will hold office for three years.”
Also read: CoA not involved any BCCI members while taking the new fees hike decision
It means, the tenures of the interim president CK Khanna, interim secretary Amitabh Choudhary and Treasurer Anirudh Chaudhry have ended already.
Vinod Rai-leading CoA wrote in their report, “In our respectful understanding the aforesaid order dated January 2, 2017 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court does not deal with issue of tenure of office bearers. The said order provides that i) the senior most vice-president shall perform duties of president. ii) joint secretary shall perform duties of secretary. iii) other office-bearers shall continue, all subject to conditions stipulated therein. Accordingly, if the respective terms of senior-most vice-president and joint secretary have expired, they cannot continue to perform their duties of the President and secretary respectively.”
CoA also recommended the removal of IPL Governing Council Chairman Rajeev Shukla, who had an extended tenure for one year that ended in the last September.
Also read: BCCI Gives Green Signal for DRS In IPL 2018
CoA also wrote in their report, “These interim directions are necessarily required so that the persons who are consciously guilty of non-compliance of the recommendations passed by the Honourable Justice Lodha Committee, as well as the orders passed by this Honourable Court, are disabled from benefiting from their conscious non-compliance and, in particular, do not get the benefit of an extended tenure because of such non-compliance.”
