Explained: What the new Supreme Court ruling means for BCCI and its office bearers
cricket administration in India, on Wednesday the Supreme Court allowed significant amendments to the Constitution of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), chiefly related to the consecutive terms of the office-bearers and the cooling-off period between terms in office. While the ruling, in effect, clears the path for BCCI president Sourav Ganguly and secretary Jay Shah to continue for a second consecutive term, though there is a strong buzz that fresh elections could be in the offing, the order needs to be properly understood. Timesofindia.com is here to make it simple to comprehend. WHAT THE RULE WAS EARLIERBefore we dissect the latest SC ruling on the matter, it must be noted that the apex court altered its own ruling of 2018. In 2018, the SC, based on the Justice Lodha panel's recommendations, had ruled that... 1) an office-bearer must undergo a three-year cooling-off period after two consecutive terms -- whether it be with a state association or with BCCI or even cumulative, i.e., first three years with BCCI and the next three years with a state association, or vice versa. Now this clause from the 2018 amendment of the Constitution wasn't allowing Ganguly and Shah to continue as the BCCI president and secretary, respectively, because both had served as office-bearers in state cricket associations of Bengal and Gujarat before being elected to the BCCI offices.
