Rediff Logo
Line
Channels: Astrology | Broadband | Contests | E-cards | Money | Movies | Romance | Search | Women
Partner Channels: Bill Pay | Health | IT Education | Jobs | Travel
Line
Home > Cricket > PTI > News
July 12, 2001
Feedback  
  sections

 -  News
 -  Diary
 -  Betting Scandal
 -  Schedule
 -  Interview
 -  Columns
 -  Gallery
 -  Statistics
 -  Match Reports
 -  Specials
 -  Broadband
 -  Archives
 -  Search Rediff


 
 Search the Internet
         Tips
 Zimbabwe

E-Mail this report to a friend

Print this page

BCCI questions Jadeja's claim

The Board of Control for Cricket in India on Thursday told the the Delhi high court that cricketer Ajay Jadeja, banned for five years on charges of match-fixing, cannot claim any relief for violation of fundamental rights, as the board has the power to take action against a player for "misconduct" even on suspicion.

Ajay Jadeja "If the BCCI finds that the conduct of a player is not good then he cannot to be considered for selection in the team though he might be an icon. The board can suspend a player if there is suspicion of misconduct against him even if there is no hard evidence," BCCI counsel Kapil Sibal told Justice Mukul Mudgal, who was hearing Jadeja's petition, challenging the ban.

Asserting that the board does not perform any of the functions of the state, Sibal said the team selected by the BCCI to play matches with foreign teams, "does not represent India as a state, but is a BCCI team representing India."

Thus, Sibal said since the board is not performing any of the state's functions, Jadeja cannot claim any relief under Article 226 of the Constitution, and, as such, the cricketer's petition should be dismissed.

"He cannot even claim any damage through a civil suit, as the BCCI has no contract with him at present," he said.

The contract with a player is always signed by the board after he is selected to a team for a particular season, either to play Test matches or one-dayers in the country or abroad, Sibal said, adding that the BCCI rules are clear on this.

However, Jadeja's counsel P P Malhotra said the BCCI cannot not shirk the responsibility of performing the duty of state so far as the management of the game of cricket is concerned.

"The team bears the Indian flag and players' badges also say that they represent India," he said.

The arguments from both sides were confined to the issue of maintainability of the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.

Jadeja's counsel said: "The scope of Article 226, under which any citizen can move the high court for seeking relief for violation of his rights, is very wide and, as such, a right can be enforced against a state, its authorities or a person."

He said the board, which gets various types of concessions, including land on nominal price for stadia, security assistance for organising matches, relief on Income Tax and entertainment taxes, cannot not claim that it has nothing to do with the state.

"The BCCI is an authority set up to manage, regulate and conduct the game of cricket in the country and performs all functions which a state is supposed to do," he said, adding any person aggrieved by the BCCI's action has a right to claim relief from the court.

Malhotra said even the government in its affidavit had stated that it is supplementing the efforts of the BCCI in promoting the game in India by providing it various facilities. Then how could it "shirk" from the responsibility?, he asked.

Jadeja, in his civil writ, has sought quashing of the ban as well as Union Sports Ministry's notice to him, seeking an explanation why the Arjuna award conferred on him should not be taken back.

The BCCI had imposed a life ban on former captain Mohammad Azharuddin and Ajay Sharma, while Jadeja and Manoj Prabhakar were banned for five years.

Mail Cricket Editor

(c) Copyright 2000 PTI. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of PTI content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent.