"The said CSK is not a legal entity as such. It is the second respondent (India Cements) who participated in the proceedings before the Bombay High Court, Supreme Court, HPPC, DPC, as owner of the franchisee CSK... Though the writ petitioner was incorporated on 19.12.2014, it did not choose to appear before the Hon'ble Supreme Court," the BCCI said in its counter affidavit submitted to the Madras High Court.
The affidavit said that there was a possibility of conflict of decisions if the present writ petition is entertained by this Court.
It further submitted that the action of the answering respondent in imposing punishment as a disciplinary action is not in discharge of any public duty.
"This High Court may be pleased to dismiss the writ petition," the BCCI said in the affidavit.