Indian Super League (ISL) side FC Goa, which was slapped a Rs 11 crore fine and their co-owners Shrinivas Dempo and Dattaraj Salgaocar banned for two and three seasons respectively, has challenged the order of the tournament's regulatory commission.
FC Goa has yesterday filed an appeal before the ISL Appeals Commission challenging the said order.
On May 5, the ISL Regulatory Commission took the decisions after the conclusion of the hearings in Mumbai relating to the controversy surrounding the scuffle between Chennaiyin FC's Brazillian marquee player Elano Blumer and FC Goa officials after the ISL second season final in Margao in December last.
As per the appeal copy, which in possession with PTI, no opportunity was given to cross examine any of the witnesses and no opportunity was afforded to FC Goa to present evidence as to what actually transpired on December 20 last year.
"The statement of the football legend, Arthur Antunes Coimbra (better known as Zico) as to what actually transpired on December 20 has been shut out and truth made a casualty," the club has claimed.
FC Goa, which won the first season of ISL, termed the order as "perverse, unlawful and in complete violation of principles of natural justice".
In separate appeals filed by co-owners Salgaocar and Dempo, they have stated that neither they were party before the commission nor were they called upon to appear in the hearing of the complaints.
"Documents and complete unedited video footage of the incident from all the TV cameras in custody of a private TV channel has not been provided despite numerous requests," it claimed.
The Club has also pointed out that the AIFF Appeals Committee has directed that status quo be maintained with regard to the hearings before the ISL Regulatory Commission.
"The sanctions imposed on FC Goa are unprecedented in the world of football, and also shockingly disproportionate, punitive in nature, absolutely arbitrary and without any basis in law or fact," the appeal has said.
FC Goa on April 30 had challenged the jurisdiction of the ISL Regulatory Commission and prayed that it adjourn the hearing of the complaints before it sine die and maintain status quo until the AIFF Appeal Committee decides the issue of "double jeopardy and jurisdiction".
(REOPENS BOM 18)
As per the appeal, this prayer was made since AIFF Disciplinary Committee had on January 25 ruled that it had exclusive jurisdiction over all matters relating to discipline under AIFF Disciplinary Code, including those relating to the ISL.
"Further, on March 31 on the issue of FC Goa's fine of Rs 50 lakh, the AIFF Appeal Committee felt that it needs further clarification on the issue of double jeopardy and jurisdiction of ISL over this matter and the case was deferred for hearing to a later date.
"The Committee had, in the meanwhile, requested both AIFF and ISL to maintain status quo in the matter of hearing of the proceeding," it said.
FC Goa has claimed that a hearing on the same was held on May 3 but no arguments were made on the merits of the matter by either parties.
Defending its case, the club has said ISL is a league run under the sanction and authority of the AIFF.
"The AIFF is the apex body that governs football. From the AIFF Constitution, the AIFF Disciplinary Code and the ISL Rules, it is clear that the ISL is subordinate and is bound by the decisions of AIFF and its Disciplinary and Appeals Committee," it added.
"As the ISL is bound by the Order of the AIFF Appeals Committee dated March 31 directing the ISL Regulatory Commission to maintain status quo with regard to the hearings before it, there is no question of the ISL Regulatory Commission proceeding in the matter," the appeal said.
