SUPREME COURT QUESTIONS MAHARASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION OVER SELECTION OF INEXPERIENCED MEMBERS:

The Supreme Court on Tuesday raised concerns over the management of the Maharashtra Cricket Association (MCA), highlighting the importance of involving retired cricketers in decision-making roles to ensure expert guidance. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul Pancholi was hearing petitions challenging a Bombay High Court order that stayed the MCA elections, originally scheduled for January 6, citing concerns of nepotism and favoritism.

The High Court, in its order, had emphasized the necessity of judicial intervention to prevent the elections from proceeding under allegedly irregular circumstances. During the Supreme Court hearing, the CJI noted a sudden and significant increase in MCA membership in 2023, observing that the Association had expanded its membership far beyond historical levels. He pointed out that from 1986 to 2023, the MCA had maintained 164 members, but in 2023, there was a “bumper draw” of new members.

Senior Advocate A.M. Singhvi, representing some petitioners, explained that a committee led by a retired judge had rejected 48 existing members and inducted a large number of new ones. He also highlighted that the Charity Commissioner, without consulting the state cabinet, had appointed an administrator for the Association. When asked about donations made by individual members, Singhvi stated that one person, who was related to the authorities, had contributed 2,000 acres of land.

The CJI emphasized the importance of appointing experienced sportspeople, particularly retired cricketers, to such Associations, noting that their expertise and respect in the field would contribute meaningfully to governance. He expressed concern over the inclusion of members who had little knowledge of cricket, observing that the Association appeared to be filling positions with individuals who could not even hold a bat, and warned that the Court’s disapproval of these practices could be strongly voiced. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing Kedar Jadhav, one of the petitioners and a former international cricketer, confirmed that the original petition before the High Court had been filed by Jadhav.

The CJI also highlighted the broader need for an independent forum or tribunal for the governance of all sports in India, not just cricket, stressing that athletes themselves should be respected for their contribution to the game. He cited cricket and hockey as examples, noting that the achievements of players should be acknowledged and reflected in how associations are managed.

The Court directed that, as the matter was to be heard by the High Court the next day, all contentions should be raised there. Petitioners were permitted to withdraw their Supreme Court petitions and pursue any modification of directions before the High Court in accordance with law.

The dispute had arisen after Kedar Jadhav challenged the sudden addition of 401 new members to the MCA voter list. Several of the new members were reportedly relatives of NCP-SP MLA Rohit Pawar, including his wife Kuntee Pawar and NCP-SP MP Supriya Sule’s daughter, along with individuals with political or business links to Rohit Pawar and active NCP-SP party members. Jadhav contended that these additions were part of a pattern of favoritism that threatened the integrity of the election process.