BCCI's disciplinary committee defers decision on RCA

The BCCI's disciplinary committee has deferred taking a decision on what the future course of action in the Rajasthan Cricket Association suspension case should be. The decision was taken after a long meeting on Saturday between the committee and RCA officials, after the RCA officials raised several objections, including on the formation and make-up of the BCCI disciplinary committee itself.

The RCA was suspended in May by the BCCI after former IPL chairman Lalit Modi, who was expelled by the BCCI last year for "committing acts of serious misconduct and indiscipline", was elected the state association's president. The BCCI suspended it for allowing a banned individual to be a part of its affairs, and, later, omitted the various teams representing Rajasthan from its domestic programme for the upcoming season. That left the players anxious and confused as to what their future holds, and this meeting was supposed to clear up some of that confusion.

Given the objections raised by the RCA officials, though, the players will have to wait a while more. "Our objection [to the disciplinary committee] was on two grounds," Abdi, who was one of two RCA officials present, said. "One was the constitution and jurisdiction, and secondly about the quorum." BCCI secretary Sanjay Patel, who was also present, confirmed that the meeting had been deferred and the next date will be decided in due course.

The disciplinary committee consists of BCCI interim president Shivlal Yadav, vice-president Rajiv Shukla and sidelined president N Srinivasan. Srinivasan, who has been sidelined by the Supreme Court of India till the investigation into the alleged corruption in IPL 2013 is complete, was not part of the meeting.

The RCA alleged that the BCCI disciplinary committee wasn't constituted during the BCCI's annual general meeting in 2013 as per its rulebook. Abdi also said that the committee has only two members as of now - sidelined BCCI president N Srinivasan, who is a member of the committee, was not present at the meeting - whereas the rules prescribe a three-member committee.

In response, Patel stressed that the constitution of the committee was in accordance with rules. "As an honorary secretary who has attended that meeting, I am telling you that it is a proper committee," Patel said. "The committee is constitutionally valid, properly appointed and approved by the AGM in the AGM. Everything has been done properly."

However, to establish his point further, Abdi asked that the minutes of the last AGM, held on September 29, 2013, in Chennai, be produced. "They told us that the minutes of the 2013 AGM are not at the cricket centre, whereas under their own bylaws within two months of the AGM the draft minutes of the AGM should be circulated to all the state associations, which they have not done even after a year," Abdi said.

Patel said the minutes could not be handed over since they will only be approved in the next AGM. "AGM minutes cannot be given as they are not finalised. Even today they are draft minutes. Minutes can be considered minutes only when they are passed in the next AGM," he said.

Abdi also demanded that Rajiv Shukla be replaced on the committee since, he alleged, he holds a personal grudge against Lalit Modi. "There has been a series of public spats between Mr Lalit Modi and Mr Rajiv Shukla on various issues concerning cricket and cricket politics. We objected to it, Mr Shukla being a member of the committee, it will prejudice the interest of the RCA.

"The heart of the matter in the RCA controversy is election of Mr Lalit Modi, because the RCA was suspended only after Lalit Modi was elected as president. The suspension of RCA came about only on the day Lalit Modi was declared as the president of the RCA. Before his election there was no suspension. Mr Shukla having this kind of acrimony against Mr Lalit Modi should not be a member of the committee."

Abdi, who represented the RCA along with RCA secretary Sumendra Tiwary, also requested they be allowed additional legal assistance, but the request was turned down since the BCCI rules do not permit external legal assistance for internal matters.