Gujarat High Court Bars Kiran More from BCA Elections Citing Supreme Court Tenure Rules
The Gujarat High Court delivered a significant ruling on Monday, disqualifying former Indian cricketer Kiran More and three other candidates from contesting the upcoming Baroda Cricket Association (BCA) elections. The court also quashed the election officer's decision to accept their nomination papers for the positions of office-bearers.
Petition Challenges Candidature Based on Supreme Court Guidelines
Justice Niral Mehta allowed a petition filed by two BCA members who objected to the candidature of Kiran More, Amul Jikar, Anant Indulkar, and Amar Petiwale. The petitioners demanded the implementation of Supreme Court guidelines that disqualify individuals who have completed a cumulative nine-year tenure as office-bearer and/or councillor in a state cricket association.
The Supreme Court judgment mandates a three-year cooling-off period after two consecutive terms. The petitioners argued that these guidelines should be strictly enforced and sought the disqualification of all four candidates based on these provisions.
Court Finds Electoral Officer Failed in Statutory Duty
In its detailed order, the High Court stated, "This court is of the considered opinion that Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 (More, Jikar, Indulkar and Petiwali) have incurred disqualification from contesting the election for the post of 'office-bearer'. The electoral officer ought to have rejected the nomination forms submitted by Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 and should have proceeded to declare them disqualified in accordance with law."
The court held that the electoral officer "failed to discharge the statutory duty cast upon him under Rule 33" by not properly adjudicating the objections raised against the nomination and candidature of the four individuals. The court further noted that the officer did not communicate any decision regarding these objections.
Justice Mehta emphasized that "even on merits, the action of the electoral officer in accepting the nomination and candidature of Respondent Nos. 4 to 7 and including their names in the final list of candidates is arbitrary, illegal and unsustainable in law."
Background and Interim Arrangements
Earlier, on February 13, the High Court had allowed the BCA elections to proceed as a measure of interim relief for More and the other candidates. However, the court ordered the association to withhold the election results until the outcome of this petition was determined.
Since the tenure of the last elected body has lapsed, the High Court permitted it to continue functioning but restrained it from making any policy decisions. This arrangement has been extended for two additional weeks to allow the disqualified candidates time to challenge the order before a higher judicial forum.
Implications for Cricket Administration
This ruling reinforces the importance of implementing Supreme Court guidelines designed to prevent prolonged tenures in cricket administration. The decision highlights several key aspects:
- Strict enforcement of tenure limits for cricket association office-bearers
- Mandatory cooling-off periods after consecutive terms
- Proper adjudication of election objections by electoral officers
- Judicial oversight of sports administration processes
The case sets a precedent for how state cricket associations must handle election procedures and candidate eligibility, particularly regarding tenure limitations established by the Supreme Court to promote transparency and rotation in sports governance.
