In a ruling that will have far-reaching ramifications for sports bodies in the country, the Supreme Court has ruled that since the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) performs “Public function,” it actions are subject to judicial review.
Deciding whether BCCI was a State under Article 12 of the Constitution whose administration and functions can be scrutinised by High Courts under Article 226, the Bench of Justices TS Thakur and FM Ibrahim Kalifulla, said, “BCCI may not be a State under Article 12 of the Constitution but is certainly amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution.”
The judgement came as a setback to BCCI that was run as a private society registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act even as it opened scope for judicial scrutiny of sport bodies in the country.
BCCI former President N Srinivasan, against whom Court established conflict of interest in the IPl betting scandal, argued that IPl was a private affair of BCCI that enjoyed immunity of being a private registered society.
But the bench reasoned that cricket is a passion in this country and cricketers being icons have in the past been decorated with the highest Indian civilian honour of Bharat Ratna, Padma Vibhushan, Padma Bhushan and Padma Sri besides other sporting awards. While a private body like BCCI was allowed by the Central Government to select the national team, participate in international tournaments and decide the career of a player, the Court wondered why the state had not chosen to bring any law or taken any step to bring a law either to deprive or dilute the Board’s monopoly in the field of cricket.
It then concluded, “Any organisation or entity that has such pervasive control over the game and its affairs and such powers as can make dreams end up in smoke or come true, cannot be said to be undertaking any private activity. The functions of the Board are clearly public functions…no matter discharged by a society.”