Supreme Court Upholds Bombay HC Stay on MCA Elections, Criticizes Membership Drive
The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday delivered a strong rebuke to the Maharashtra Cricket Association (MCA) for its large-scale induction of new members ahead of organizational elections scheduled this year. The apex court refused to interfere with a Bombay High Court order that had stayed the MCA elections, citing concerns over the hurried and allegedly irregular grant of membership to hundreds of individuals with no connection to the sport.
Court Questions Timing and Nature of New Memberships
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi expressed deep dissatisfaction with the MCA's actions. "In our country, there are hundreds of eminent retired cricketers who have done the country and their states proud with their performances," the bench remarked. "We would have respected your election-eve membership drive if you had enrolled the ex-cricketers as members."
The court highlighted the stark contrast in membership numbers, noting that from 1986 to 2023, the MCA had only 168 members. However, from 2023 onward, the association suddenly decided to enroll approximately 400 new members, a move the bench described as a "bumper draw" that raised serious questions about the integrity of the electoral process.
Bench Dismisses Supervision by Retired Judge
The MCA's defense that the late-stage inductions were supervised by a retired High Court judge did not impress the Supreme Court bench. "Unfortunately, some retired judges agree to lend their services to such unfortunate events," the justices observed, underscoring their skepticism about the legitimacy of the membership drive.
In a pointed criticism, the bench added, "Unfortunately, you have given membership to those who do not know how to hold a cricket bat." This comment emphasized the court's view that the new members lacked any genuine affiliation with cricket, undermining the association's purpose.
Petition by Ex-Cricketer Kedar Yadav
The case reached the courts through a petition filed by former cricketer Kedar Yadav, who has represented India at the national level. Yadav alleged that the admission of so many new members effectively changed the Constitution of the MCA and involved the induction of businessmen and relatives of office-bearers who had nothing to do with cricket.
The Bombay High Court, while staying the elections scheduled for January 6, had stated, "The Court is entitled to examine the decision-making process, particularly as to how about 400 new members were inducted in the MCA under different categories, in the face of allegations of illegality, arbitrariness and nepotism." The HC noted that the large-scale induction just two months prior to the election announcement raised prima facie doubts about the procedure, as it could alter the election's outcome.
Supreme Court's Emphasis on Sports Management
The Supreme Court bench used the opportunity to stress the importance of involving experienced sportspersons in sports management. "The petitioner is a renowned cricketer who has represented India. In India, outstanding sportspersons must be involved in the management of sports in their respective fields," the justices asserted, reinforcing the need for credibility and expertise in governing bodies like the MCA.
Withdrawal of Appeal and Future Proceedings
Facing a reluctant bench, senior advocate A M Singhvi, representing the MCA, agreed to withdraw the appeal. He sought liberty to raise all contentions before the Bombay High Court, which is scheduled to resume hearing on Yadav's petition on February 4. The Supreme Court permitted the withdrawal and allowed the MCA to present its pleas before the HC regarding the vacation of the stay on elections.
This development leaves the MCA elections in limbo, with the Bombay High Court's stay remaining in effect as the legal battle over the membership inductions continues. The case highlights ongoing issues in sports administration in India, particularly concerning transparency and the inclusion of genuine stakeholders in decision-making processes.
