N. Srinivasan's Conflict of Interest Lands Him and BCCI on a Sticky Wicket

After almost 18 months of deliberations, the Supreme Court on Thursday knocked out administrators with dual interest in cricket administration. Effectively, ICC chairman N. Srinivasan can seek re-election as president of the BCCI only if he relinquishes ownership of Chennai Super Kings. Srinivasan's company India Cements owns the IPL franchise.

In keeping with its mood, a special Supreme Court Bench delivered a technical knockout to the most powerful man in world cricket. By striking down a controversial clause that allowed BCCI officials to have commercial interests in the glamorous and cash-rich IPL and Champions League T20, the judges made it amply clear that Srinivasan had defeated the credentials of a true sports administrator who didn't have business interests in mind. (Srinivasan refuses to comment)

By appointing a three-member committee, comprising former Chief Justice of India Justice R.M. Lodha and other former judges of the top court Justice Ashok Bhan and Justice RV Ravindran -- the Supreme Court has exposed the massive flaws in BCCI's constitution that were amended to suit Srinivasan and his many loyalists. The top panel will recommend changes to the BCCI in a bid to ensure fair governance. (Timeline: Complete IPL saga)

It won't be a surprise if Srinivasan chooses to lead BCCI. The 70-year-old Tamil Nadu business tycoon must stay in-charge of BCCI to ethically hold his position as ICC's first chairman. The BCCI must hold its much-delayed elections in the next six weeks. Srinivasan is seeking re-election as an East Zone candidate. Earlier, presidents were nominated by their respective zones. Srinivasan changed that rule to suit himself. (Ten developments)

The top developments (in ascending order) of the IPL betting and spot-fixing case:

1. The case dates back to June 2013. Aditya Verma, secretary of the Cricket Association of Bihar (CAB), filed a PIL in Bombay High Court raising charges of a conflict of interest in the Board's two-member inquiry panel probing corruption in IPL. The Bombay High Court declared the probe "illegal".

2. The BCCI and the CAB went to the Supreme Court against the Bombay High Court order. Verma's lawyers said the Bombay court could have suggested a fresh mechanism to investigate the charges of corruption.

3. In October 2013, the Supreme Court appointed a three-member committee, headed by former High Court judge Mukul Mudgal. The panel included additional solicitor general L Nageswara Rao and senior advocate Nilay Dutta. The Supreme Court wanted the panel to conduct an independent inquiry into the allegations of corruption against Srinivasan's son-in-law Gurunath Meiyappan, India Cements, and Rajasthan Royals team owner Raj Kundra. The team was also asked to probe allegations of betting and spot-fixing in IPL and the involvement of players.

4. On February 10, 2014, the Mudgal Committee submitted two reports to the Supreme court. One submitted jointly by Mudgal and Rao and one by Dutta. They also filed a sealed envelope containing 13 names against whom there were "unsubstantiated" charges of corruption. One of the names was Srinivasan.

5. On March 28, Supreme Court suspends Srinivasan as BCCI president. In its interim order, the court says Srinivasan will be replaced by former cricketers Sunil Gavaskar and Shivlal Yadav. Gavaskar was given charge of IPL affairs while former Test spinner Yadav was entrusted with non-IPL issues.

6. On April 15, Srinivasan files an affidavit saying the Supreme Court should reinstate him as BCCI president. Srinivasan says he is innocent and allegations of conflict of interest were baseless. He also says that he never tried to hide the real identity of Meiyappan, indicted by Mudgal committee for betting and sharing team (Chennai Super Kings) information.

7. In May this year, following the panel's initial report, the Supreme Court gave the Mudgal committee greater powers to investigate the contents of the sealed envelope. Assisted by former senior IPS officer BB Mishra and Mumbai and Chennai police among others, the panel got greater investigative powers for search and seizure of relevant documents. It did not have the power to arrest. The panel was asked to submit a report by August-end.

8. The Mudgal panel seeks a two-month extension to complete its probe. The Supreme Court allows the extension.

9. BCCI lawyers wants Srinivasan to be reinstated since the Board AGM was due. The Bench refused saying BCCI AGM was "not its concern." The court also referred to an earlier order by Justice AK Patnaik saying Srinivasan "could not come back as BCCI president as long as the probe is on." BCCI puts off AGM to November 20, clearly indicating that it will wait for Supreme Court's ruling on 'suspended' Srinivasan.

10. The two-judge bench of Justice TS Thakur and Justice FM Kalifullah reserves its order after the end of hearings on December 17.