NEW DELHI, APRIL 5 (AGENCIES): The Supreme Court today asked the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) to reveal details of funds the BCCI has allocated to the states like Nagaland, Manipur and Tripura in the past five years.
India’s apex court slammed the BCCI and accused it of doing nothing to develop cricket in the country.
The BCCI came in for sharp criticism after it informed the apex court that allocation of funds to eleven states was zero. In a scathing attack on the activities of the cricket board, the apex court said, “BCCI has created a mutually beneficial society.”
Questioning why eleven states were penniless, the court observed that the BCCI must have distributive justice. Why should these states go begging? the top court asked. “You (BCCI) have allocated Rs 480 crore in one year to state cricket associations for the development of cricketing infrastructure. In the past 20 years, more than Rs 2000 crore have been given approximately.
“Have you monitored these funds as how it is being utilized. There is no credible monitoring mechanism to look at whether even infrastructure has been created or not,” a bench headed by Chief Justice of India TS Thakur had said.
Criticising BCCI’s funds allocation process, the SC observed that funds have been distributed without a rationale like a “mutually beneficial society”. The apex governing body for cricket in the country submitted a list of funds to the SC that it had disbursed to state bodies over the last five years. The list shows that BCCI had not given any funds to eleven state cricket associations, including Bihar, during the period.
“BCCI must have distributive justice, why are eleven states penniless? Why should these states go begging?,” the SC bench asked lawyers representing BCCI. The BCCI has 30 cricket body members, four associate members and three affiliate members. “Impression one gets is that once BCCI gives money to state boards without any rationale, they in a way corrupt them,” the SC observed during the hearing. The bench also questioned the procedure for fund allocation and whether it was done on face value.
