High Court asks cricket body if it will seek extra water for IPL pitches, ground

The Bombay High Court today sought to know from the Maharashtra Cricket Association (MCA) if it would seek additional water supply from the Pune civic body for ground and pitch maintenance for six IPL matches shifted to that city from Chennai.

The MCA stadium at Gahunje in Pune will host the remaining six ‘home’ matches of IPL franchise Chennai Super Kings (CSK) after these were shifted from the southern city following protests over the Cauvery water-sharing issue in the Tamil Nadu capital.

A division bench of justices A S Oka and Riyaz Chagla sought the MCA response while hearing a public interest litigation filed by NGO Loksatta Movement in 2016.

Opposing holding of IPL matches in Maharashtra, the NGO had raised concerns over water usage for ground management at a time when the state was reeling under drought.

The bench was today informed by the petitioner’s lawyer that while originally 11 matches were to be played in Maharashtra during the ongoing IPL, six games, which were to be played in Chennai, have now been shifted to Pune.

The lawyer argued that the Pune city and rural areas of the district were already facing water shortage.

The judges then sought to know from the MCA, which manages the stadium, if it would be seeking more water than what is being already supplied to it by the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC).

Last week, the high court had posed the same query to the Mumbai Cricket Association, which manages the Wankhede stadium, another IPL venue.

The court had asked the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) if it would supply additional water to the stadium in South Mumbai.

The BMC today filed an affidavit, saying no special water supply would be given to the stadium.

The court posted the petition for further hearing on April 18.

The M A Chidambaram Stadium in Chennai was the home ground of the Mahendra Singh Dhoni-led CSK. The IPL franchise played its first home match on April 10 against the Kolkata Knight Riders.

Political parties and other groups in Tamil Nadu had demanded that all the IPL matches scheduled in Chennai be cancelled till the Centre forms the Cauvery Water Management Board. They held protests in support of their demand.

The Supreme Court had on February 16 pronounced its verdict on the Cauvery dispute between Tamil Nadu and Karnataka.

“The matches had to be shifted out of Chennai as police had said that they were unable to provide security in the prevailing situation” IPL Chairman Rajv Shukla had said on April 12.

Swamy moves SC for urgent hearing on plea against ban on CSK

Swamy moves SC for urgent hearing on plea against ban on CSK
Swamy moves SC for urgent hearing on plea against ban on CSK

BJP leader Subramanian Swamy today moved the Supreme Court seeking urgent hearing on his application challenging the two-year ban imposed on the IPL franchisee, Chennai Super Kings (CSK), over the 2013 betting scam involving its top official Gurunath Meiyappan.

Swamy told a bench headed by Chief Justice T S Thakur that the matter was listed for July 26 but it was not taken up due to hearing of entry tax matter by a nine-judge Constitution bench.

The bench, also comprising justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud, asked Swamy to mention the matter next week after which it will be listed.

Earlier, in his plea before the Supreme Court, Swamy had also sought a CBI probe into the petition filed before it by Cricket Association of Bihar (CAB).

Swamy had alleged that his earlier plea was wrongly rejected by the Madras High Court on the issue.

The high court on January 20 had dismissed Swamy’s PIL challenging the suspension of CSK and Rajasthan Royals, saying it was not maintainable.

Star-studded CSK, then led by M S Dhoni, and Rajasthan Royals were on July 14, last year suspended for two years from the Indian Premier League in a clean-up exercise following the 2013 betting scam involving their top officials Meiyappan and Raj Kundra.

Meiyappan, son-in-law of the then BCCI chief N Srinivasan and a former Team Principal of CSK, and Kundra, co-owner of Jaipur IPL that runs Rajasthan Royals (RR), were suspended for life from any match conducted by BCCI.

The punishments were handed down by a three-member panel headed by former CJI R M Lodha which was asked by the Supreme Court to decide the quantum of punishment after finding them guilty of betting.

The Madras High Cout had also dismissed a similar petition by the owner of CSK challenging Justice Lodha panel’s order.

( Source – PTI )

SC to hear pleas against high court verdict on IPL probe panel

The Supreme Court will Sep 11 hear cross-petitions by the BCCI and Cricket Association of Bihar challenging the Bombay High Court judgment holding that the panel that probed allegations of betting and spot fixing during the sixth version of IPL was not validly constituted.

A bench of Justice A.K. Patnaik and Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar, while directing the listing of the matter for final hearing Sep 11, issued notice to the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI); N. Srinivasan, who stepped aside as BCCI chief; Indian Cements Ltd – the owner of Chennai Super Kings; and Jaipur IPL Cricket Private Ltd on the CAB’s plea.

A two-member probe panel comprising retired judges Justice T. Jayarama Chouta and Justice R. Balasubramanian had given a clean chit to Chennai Super King’s Gurunath Meiyappan, the son-in-law of Srinivasan, and Rajasthan Royals owner Raj Kundra for their alleged involvement in betting in Indian Premier League (IPL).

While BCCI has challenged the high court verdict holding the probe panel as invalid, the Bihar cricket panel filed a petition contending that the high court, after invalidating the two-member probe panel as not validly constituted in terms of apex cricketing body’s rules, should have on its own appointed an independent inquiry panel.

Appearing for the Bihar Cricket Association, senior counsel Harish Salve said the cross-petitions had been filed to address the limited portion of the High court judgment wherein after junking the validity of the BCCI probe panel, it did not take to its logical conclusion by setting up a probe panel on its own or suggesting suitable alternate method to inquire into the various allegations.

He said that after observing that the BCCI’s probe panel suffered from “serious lack of probity, transparency and respect for its own Rules” was it correct on the part of the high court to refrain from taking steps to ensure that further course of investigation is also not tainted by the lack of sincerity and vested motives of Srinivasan.

Appearing for the BCCI, senior counsel C.A. Sundram urged the court to hold hearing on the BCCI plea as the outcome of this hearing would also address the contention being made in the plea by the Cricket Association of Bihar.

Srinivasan had to step aside as BCCI president in the wake of allegation of the involvement of Meiyappan, who was looking after IPL franchise Chennai Super Kings, in the betting scandal. Srinivasan was replaced by Jagmohan Dalmiya who held temporary charge for the day-to-day running of the cricketing body’s affairs.

(Source: IANS)