No Review of N. Srinivasan's Conflict of Interest Case, Supreme Court Dismisses BCCI Plea
BCCI's ex-president N. Srinivasan has been charged with conflict of interest by Supreme Court since he had commercial interest in IPL team Chennai Super Kings
- NDTVSports
- Updated: September 29, 2015 04:40 pm IST
The Supreme Court has dismissed a plea by Board of Control for Cricket in India seeking review of the conflict of issue clause in its constitution. Effectively, N. Srinivasan, the BCCI's former president, will not be able to have stakes in IPL team Chennai Super Kings as long he was a cricket Board member. (Shashank Manohar-Anurag Thakur Not in Favour of Pawar-Srinivasan Alliance)
The BCCI had filed a review petition seeking reconsideration of court verdict saying court can't interfere with the internal matters of BCCI and public policy can't be imposed on BCCI which is a private body. On Tuesday, the top court dismissed BCCI's petition saying there was no merit in the case. (N Srinivasan's Meeting with Sharad Pawar Yields No Results)
Review petitions are not heard in open court but decided in chambers of judges. (N Srinivasan Feels an Election in BCCI Will Add Bitterness in the BCCI)
On January 22 this year, the Supreme Court charged Srinivasan with conflict of interest because his company India Cements owned Chennai Super Kings. Srinivasan was also in the docks because his son-in-law Gurunath Meiyappan, a CSK team owner, was indicted for betting during 2013 IPL. (N Srinivasan Meets Sharad Pawar)
The court had also appointed the Justice RM Lodha panel to probe the IPL betting case and recommend punishment to those involved in the scandal.
On July 14, the Lodha panel suspended Chennai Super Kings and Rajasthan Royals for two years. Meiyappan and Raj Kundra of Rajasthan were banned from cricket activities for life.
The panel is still reviewing the BCCI constitution and is expected to suggest changes by this year end. Srinivasan will continue to remain on the BCCI sidelines as long as the conflict of interest issue is not resolved.
(With inputs from A. Vaidyanathan)