Published>Wed, Oct 27 10 07:16 PM
The Supreme Court on Wednesday deferred to November 11 the hearing on a petition filed by suspended IPL Commissioner Lalit Modi seeking reconstitution of BCCI disciplinary committee probing allegations of financial irregularities against him.
The matter was adjourned as Modi's counsel and senior advocate Ram Jethmalani made a plea in this regard before a bench comprising Justices J M Panchal and H L Gokhale.
The bench, which had on October 21 asked the BCCI to consider keeping away the three members of the disciplinary committee from the Board's AGM when the members vote on its report, wanted to know about the progress made in that regard.
However, as the matter came for hearing, Jethmalani said he wanted a short adjournment.
While he was making the plea, BCCI's counsel C A Sundaram said it should be made clear that on behalf of Modi it was stated that an attempt would be made to settle the matter on the issue of disciplinary committee.
He said he was making the submission in this regard as various types of statements are coming in the media relating to the issue.
Sundram said it was Jethmalani who wanted his good offices on the issue.
The court did not record oral submissions nor passed any order and simply adjourned the matter for November 11.
During the earlier hearing, the bench had asked the BCCI, "Why don't you consider that these three members of the disciplinary committee recused themselves from participating in the AGM which will go into the report and vote."
There are 30 members who participate in BCCI's AGM.
The suggestion by the bench had come when Jethmalani had said an attempt would be made to settle the matter on the issue of disciplinary committee.
BCCI had on October 20 turned down the plea of Modi to reconstitute the disciplinary committee by bringing those persons who are not members of the Board.
Jethmalani had repeatedly argued that there was reasonable apprehension that Modi will not get a fair deal before the present committee which was biased against him.
He had submitted that people who had participated in the decision to issue showcause notices to Modi should not be a part of the disciplinary committee.
He has contended that Chirayu Amin, who was involved in the decision to issue showcause notices and later replaced Modi as the IPL Commissioner, cannot be a member of the disciplinary committee.
Modi has approached the apex court challenging the July 15 judgement of the Bombay High Court which dismissed his plea to stay the proceedings by a BCCI-appointed disciplinary committee probing allegations of financial irregularities against him.
Modi has sought removal of Arun Jaitley and Amin from the three-member committee, which also has Jyotiraditya Scindia in it, contending that they are likely to be biased against him.
Jethmalani had said he was only seeking a direction from the court that BCCI should appoint a retired judge of the apex court or high court or any senior advocate as members of the disciplinary committee but not those from the cricket board.
However, BCCI said it was not possible to include members for the committee from outside.
The Bombay High Court had dismissed the petition filed by Modi seeking reconstitution of the BCCI-appointed disciplinary committee. He had also challenged his suspension from the BCCI.
Modi had contended before the High Court that BCCI Secretary N Srinivasan had launched "persecution" against him on the basis of media reports and complaints made by rank outsiders and "meddlesome interlopers" who are neither members of the Board, nor administrators.
In his petition before the apex court, Modi said there should be a free and fair inquiry into all allegations, including the conflict of interest, against Srinivasan for owning Chennai Super Kings despite being an officer-bearer of BCCI.
He said the high court had summarily dismissed his petition in which he had sought an independent tribunal, preferably consisting of one or more retired judges of the Supreme Court, be constituted to examine the allegations against him.
The high court had refused to go into the merits of Modi's petition, saying the disciplinary committee itself could decide on its reconstitution.
Modi had said that he wanted a committee of independent persons and not of those who are members of BCCI as they would be biased against him.
Source: Web Search
0 comments:
Post a Comment