The Supreme Court today remanded back to the Lodha committee the question whether an IPL franchise member should be in BCCI, saying the panel's recommendation "does not appear to have addressed the question of conflict of interest".
The court refused to agree with the committee's recommendation that denying any role to the franchisees in the Governing Council would lead to lack of "independent" voice and said the panel's finding does not elaborately deal with the need for induction of the nominees of the IPL franchisees.
"The Committee does not appear to have addressed the question of conflict of interest in the event IPL franchisees place two nominees in the Governing Council keeping in view the fact that the Governing Council takes important decisions like players retention policy and in posting of umpires for IPL matches etc.
"There is prima facie a possibility of conflict of interest arising out of the franchisees representation in the Governing Council. Be that as it may, we do not consider it necessary to finally pronounce on this aspect which can be better left to the Committee to re-examine...," a bench of Chief Justice T S Thakur and Justice F M I Kalifulla said.
The three-member panel headed by former CJI R M Lodha had recommended reconstitution of the chief governing body, known as the Governing Council, and said it would comprise of nine members to include three ex-officio members of BCCI -- Secretary, Treasurer and CEO.
Two representatives of the Members of BCCI to be elected by the General Body, two nominees of the IPL franchisees and one nominee each to be nominated by Comptroller and Auditor General of India and from the Players' Association, the panel had recommended.
The court agreed with BCCI's submission that induction of the representatives of the franchisee would bring about a conflict of interest.
"We make it clear that if upon reconsideration of the matter the Committee takes a view that the induction of the nominees of the franchisees will not result in any conflict of interest, it shall be free to stick to its recommendations in which event the recommendations shall be deemed to have been accepted by this Court to be formalized and carried out in such manner as the Committee may decide," the bench said.
