The BCCI also contended that the judgement was "unreasoned" and "seeks to frame legislative measures for a private autonomous society in a field already occupied by legislations, both parliamentary and state".
BCCI further said the judgment authored by the CJI and Justice F M I Kalifulla (since retired) has "neither noted the contentions and facts correctly, nor dealt with the same".
"The judgment is a nullity as the judges were functus officio after passing of the main judgment of January 22, 2015 and the matter could not have been revived suo motu as no provision of law empowers the same and is contrary to the doctrine of separation of powers and contrary to settled law that the judiciary cannot make laws," the plea said.
Also Read
On July 18, the court had accepted major recommendations
of the Lodha Committee on reforms in BCCI, including a bar on ministers and civil servants and those above 70 from becoming its members, but left it to Parliament to decide whether it should come under RTI and whether betting on the game should be legalised.
The apex court had also accepted the recommendations of the Committee headed by retired Chief Justice of India Justice R M Lodha to have a CAG nominee in BCCI.
The bench also accepted the recommendation that one person should hold one post in cricket administration to avoid any conflict of interest and scrapping of all other administrative committees in BCCI after the CAG nominee comes in.
The apex court-appointed Lodha Committee had on January 4 recommended sweeping reforms and an administrative shake-up at the troubled BCCI.