Drawing flak from the Supreme Court for not implementing the justice RM Lodha Committee recommendations, BCCI president Anurag Thakur on Monday denied having asked ICC CEO Dave Richardson to state that the appointment of the panel would “tantamount to government interference” in the functioning of BCCI. He also denied allegations that he obstructed implementation of reforms suggested by the Supreme Court-appointed Lodha panel.
A bench headed by chief justice TS Thakur reserved its order on implementation of the reforms and appointment of the administrator after the BCCI sought more time for the implementation of the recommendations.
The CJI, after going through the records of the BCCI meeting, observed that “it appears that at every stage there was defiance and obstructions”.
The BCCI president, in his affidavit, said he had taken part in a recent ICC meeting where he had pointed out to ICC chairman Shashank Manohar that he, as the then BCCI president, had taken a view that the Justice Lodha panel recommendation on appointment of a CAG nominee in the apex council would amount to governmental interference and may invoke action of suspension of the Board from the ICC.
“I, therefore, requested him that he being the ICC chairman, can a letter be issued clarifying the position which he had taken as BCCI president,” the affidavit said.
“Manohar explained to me at the meeting that when the stand was taken by him (as the then BCCI chief), the matter was pending before this court and had not been decided,” Thakur said.
The affidavit further said the apex court had later rejected BCCI’s contention that the appointment of CAG nominee in the council would amount to governmental interference.
Amicus curiae Gopal Subramaniam asked the apex court to appoint an administrator or ask the Lodha Committee to do so. “BCCI prez Anurag Thakur’s letter to ICC chief Shashank Manohar amounts to interference. How can he be entrusted with responsibility to implement Lodha panel’s recommendations? The Lodha panel can nominate experts. This kind of disobedience (by BCCI) is contemptuous,” he argued.