Baroda Vote in BCCI Elections Could be Challenged in Court: Ajay Shirke to NDTV

File photo: Ajay Shirke

The intense and uncertain BCCI election may be over but if the Mumbai Cricket Association has its way the Courts could intervene. N. Srinivasan's faction may have won 7 of the 8 office bearer positions but the question is was the correct procedure followed?

In an explosive and candid exclusive interview with NDTV, former BCCI treasurer Ajay Shirke explains why the election was unfair and why all members of the BCCI need to seriously introspect. Shirke, till recently was a close aide of N Srinivasan, but has moved to the Sharad Pawar camp.

Q: It's being called a compromise of convenience. The fact that N Srinivasan is still going to be the ICC Chairman as the nominee from the BCCI when clearly this election was about releasing his stranglehold?

A: The media has called these groups as factions. I don't see that there should really be any factions. It is just that there was a contested election. Now the question here arises that carrying on to attend the ICC meeting at this stage is in no way endorsing that his stranglehold remains the way it was.

I think it is just a gesture of goodwill and it is a gesture of just building up faith and dismissing this kind of atmosphere of suspicion amongst all the members.

Q: The Mumbai Cricket Association will move the Bombay High Court - so the result of this election may not be final just yet. They feel that the Baroda Cricket Association's representative to vote, a vote that proved decisive, was unjustly given to Samarjit Sinh Gaekwad- a man from the N Srinivasan faction - do you endorse what seems set to be another long-drawn court case involving the BCCI?

A: I don't think that it is just the Mumbai Cricket Association that feels the Baroda vote was given to a particular representative.

There are innumerable instances in the past where more than one representative has claimed to be the voter of a particular association. The objection here is to the process. The chairman of the meeting simply declared after having gone out of the meeting for a couple of minutes and when he came back he declared that I appoint Mr. so and so (Samarjitsinh Gaekwad) as the representative of Baroda.

Now, on what basis he did that and what did the rival groups present, what did the rival groups have in terms of evidence, documents?

Nothing was shared with the house. That again is the kind of problem that prompts people like me to say that this is not going in the right direction.

Now, it is not just that the Mumbai Cricket Association may challenge it, maybe several others including Baroda might challenge it.

Whether there will be a long-drawn battle or the courts will quickly see what has happened will all depend on the kind of evidence that was presented and the detail or the order if any that the chairman of the meeting spelt out to declare one candidate in preference to the other.

Q: Sharad Pawar calls it the end of a one-man show, would you call it the same?

A: I don't believe in this idea of a one-man show or anything because today running a complex sports organization like the BCCI requires more than one man.

It requires about ten highly competent people of impeccable integrity and of course ability and skills to run this body in a very fair and transparent manner.

Now, clearly it was being said in private meetings and even in official meetings that the unity of the board is what had withstood the Srinivasan's camp. Now, clearly about 14 votes going in one particular direction that arithmetic has been seriously challenged.

So, I think what has happened is good and all the parties should really introspect and see that we put the interest of the board and the association ahead of any individual and we try to bring back the good great days and run this board efficiently and without further giving rise to controversies and really really work from the bottom of their heart to build up the reputation that is so necessary to run public bodies.

Q: Sharad Pawar and Anurag Thakur showed signs of victory but how can it be so when 7 of the 8 positions went to only Srinivasan's camp?

A: I have already told you that this is a big victory for Anurag Thakur. He has challenged a so-called ruling faction and he has won.

Now, the secretary of the board is the principal officer of the board and this now brings upon him a lot of responsibility and he will be of course aided and supported by his president.

It doesn't matter how many posts which went this way or that way. It was a very closely fought battle. There was the chairman's vote that enabled the result to come in a particular way.

There was the Baroda vote that is highly questionable and as you know most of the seats were decided by a difference of one or two votes. I think Thakur has put up a fantastic fight and he has made a statement