Indian sports administrators: Conflict of interest

Conflict-of-interest more widespread, deep-rooted than fixing in Indian sports

By Qaiser Mohammad Ali

Indo-Asian News Service (IANS)

New Delhi, June 6 (IANS) Turning to senior lawyer Kapil Sibal, who was representing then Indian cricket board president N. Srinivasan, Chief Justice of India T.S. Thakur said bias in a conflict of interest situation happens in a "subtle way".
 
Thakur said that on December 8, 2014, while hearing the 2013 IPL betting-fixing scandal in which Srinivasan, whose son-in-law Gurunath Meiyappan and others were central figures, was battling to come out of the conflicted zone.
 
Thakur had made the "subtle way" comment specifically when Srinivasan was trying to constitute a committee to probe the IPL betting-fixing scandal. Some members of that committee were also conflicted and the panel was eventually not accepted by the Supreme Court.
 
Separately, as secretary and later president of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), Srinivasan would attend Indian Premier League (IPL) governing council meetings, and was thus aware of the decisions the BCCI was taking. It's difficult to believe that he never shared the discussions, or decisions taken, within the BCCI with his own IPL franchise, Chennai Super Kings (CSK), and did not take undue advantage of that.
 
More than six years later, Srinivasan's daughter, Rupa, finds herself in a similar situation -- in the conflict-of-interest zone. The person who spotted her there is a retired Supreme Court judge, D.K. Jain. He pronounced his judgment as the BCCI Ethics Officer on June 3.
 
Rupa Gurunath was elected TNCA president, succeeding her father, in September 2019. Her husband, Gurunath Meiyappan, had already been banned for life by the Supreme Court for his role in the same 2013 IPL betting-fixing scandal. Rupa holds two posts -- of TNCA president and a Whole Time Director of India Cements Limited (ICL), which runs the Chennai Super Kings Cricket Ltd (CSKCL) that owns IPL franchise CSK.
 
These two are high profile cases that have caught the eye. In reality, there are any number of conflicted persons at lower levels whose unethical deeds never come to light, they do it in such a "subtle way". Usually, powerful people back these conflicted persons. These powerful persons are mostly politicians and businessmen spread across sports in India.
 
So, that brings us to the question: Who has harmed cricket -- or sports, in general -- the most in India? Many people would say that it is the people involved in match-fixing/betting.
 
However, I feel the conflict of interest is the biggest curse and misfortunate of Indian cricket, rather Indian sports. Match-fixing is probably not as deep rooted and as widespread as the conflict of interest, if closely seen across all sports, not just cricket, played in the country. The conflict of interest is everywhere; only the degree to which it influences varies. Sometimes it is blatant, as the Supreme Court and one of its judges (Jain) saw in the cases of Srinivasan and Rupa, respectively. At other times, it happens in a "subtle way".
 
Match-fixing may not be found in all competitive sports. But the conflict of interest is present across the spectrum; no Indian sport can claim it is not influenced by the conflicted people. Be it election of sports bodies or selection of athletes/teams, the conflict of interest is found everywhere -- in different forms at different levels.
 
Most of the conflicted persons are sports administrators, selectors, or coaches. If their brothers/sisters/sons/daughters/nephews/nieces are also playing cricket -- or any other sport -- in which their elders hold positions, the conflict-of-interest becomes obvious and blatant. It will be rare to find selectors, sports administrators, coaches clear of the conflict.
 
The conflict of interest is not restricted to selection of the "near and dear ones" by their fathers and uncles. It plays with full gusto while awarding contracts of constructing stadiums, laying of astro turfs/athletic tracks, athletes' clothing, sponsorship, supply of food during competitions, erecting tents, etc. The list is so long and varied that the mind boggles.
 
The conflict of interest is more widespread and blatant in cricket because there is more money to be made from it than in any other sport in India. The case of certain officials of the BCCI and its affiliated state associations, particularly the TNCA, is a case in point.
 
In cricket, sponsors pay more money, the requirements for the BCCI-organised tournaments are much bigger than the other sports. So, obviously more people come into the conflict zone as they often award these contracts and rights to their known ones, many times without following the laid down process of tender etc. The Delhi and District Cricket Association is notorious in this regard and leads the way.
 
Also, retired cricketers open academies in their names and then when confronted they claim they don't benefit from the fee that trainees pay. They insist they are run by their mothers, fathers, or brothers, as the case may be, saying they only lend their names. Many of these cricketers also sit in selection committees and become coaches. Would you believe them that they never influence selection of players, either blatantly or in a "subtle way", particularly if their sons and nephews are in contention? Impossible.
 
So, it should not have taken more than five months, since the time the complaint was filed, for the BCCI Ethics Officer to declare that TNCA president Rupa Gurunath was indeed in the conflicted zone. The conflict was so obvious.
 
Interestingly, the BCCI did not respond to the notice of Justice DK Jain. The reason is not far to seek: Srinivasan's is one of the four groups that had formed the coalition in October 2019 to come to power without having to fight an election.
 
They at all costs wanted to get rid of the Vinod Rai-headed Committee of Administrators, appointed by the Supreme Court, that had been running the BCCI for around 33 months, following the 2013 IPL betting-fixing scandal.
 
The bright side of all this is that at least the BCCI has an Ombudsman, though he at times is rendered powerless. Some sports federations might also have appointed Ombudsman. But have you heard any of them delivering judgments of the same magnitude as delivered as in the case of Rupa Gurunath? Or, any judgment at all.
 
"Purity of the game has to be maintained at any cost. Persons at the helm of affairs should be above suspicion. We are thinking in the larger interest of the game. There should be no chance for people to point fingers at those who are running the show," the TS Thakur-headed Supreme Court bench, also comprising FMI Kalifulla, had said in December 2014 while hearing the IPL scandal.
 
The already side-lined Srinivasan, whose son-in-law Meiyappan was in sharp focus in the IPL scandal, had offered to keep away from the BCCI-initiated probe involving Meiyappan and others.
 
The bench countered that by asking Srinivasan's counsel Sibal: "You [Srinivasan] say even if elected you will stay away from decision making against those found guilty. But the question is even then can the decision of BCCI be seen as a fair decision? Will not he be exercising his influence in some way or other? Bias in such situation happens in a subtle way."
 
(This story was first published by IANS on June 6, 2021)

Say It Again, The Bat Is A Lonely Hunter

How brothers Sarfaraz Khan and Musheer fought darkness and came around to be regarded among Indian cricket’s brightest talents

Sarfaraz Khan.
Photos: Emmanual Karbahri (Outlook)

By Qaiser Mohammad Ali

(This story was first published in Outook magazine dated June 1, 2020)

New Delhi: Depression, the blight that has its talons sunk across the world, can melt the doughtiest of persons. Only a few emerge stronger, but it takes mental toughness and doggedness. Sarfaraz Khan and younger brother Musheer, the young cricketers of Mumbai, seem to have those qualities in abundance. They not only overcame a tormenting 2019 but notched up career best performances in the season that ended in March.”

Even as Sarfaraz was serving a oneyear cooling-off period in 2018-19 season to qualify to represent Mumbai again on his return from Uttar Pradesh after five years, the Mumbai Cricket Association (MCA) banned Musheer for three years for indiscipline. As the blues slowly consumed Musheer, their father-cum-coach Naushad too succumbed to depression. 

The three faced a bleak future in cricket—the only thing the family lives for. But, guided by a doting Naushad and some psychiatric therapy, how the two boys have returned with stronger resolve and renewed vigour! 

From left: Sarfaraz Khan, his younger brother
Musheer, father Naushad, and third brother Moeen.

They scored runs and dismissed batsmen almost at will, playing with steely determination. Hard-hitting middle order batsman Sarfaraz, 22, finished the Ranji Trophy tournament with the highest average in India -- 154.66 -- while plundering 928 runs in six matches, comprising a fabulous, unbeaten triple and a double century.

Sarfaraz, who had hammered a record 439 for Rizvi Springfield in a Harris Shield inter-school match in 2009, chipped in with cameos for the Mumbai under-23 team for the CK Nayudu Trophy.“He has had an outstanding season. There’s no doubt about it. His comeback was due to his mental toughness and he has worked hard at his cricketing skills as well. His father, too, has worked hard. Both Sarfaraz and Musheer are talented,” former India and Mumbai captain Dilip Vengsarkar tells Outlook.

In 2015, a year after a good performance at the under-19 World Cup and Royal Challengers Bangalore (RCB) buying him for Rs. 50 lakh, Naushad had taken a transfer for Sarfaraz, still a minor, to Uttar Pradesh due to lack of opportunities in Mumbai. But the stint in Uttar Pradesh was unsatisfactory. 

Form deserted him too and a serious knee injury just before 2017 IPL added to his misery. The consolation: RCB kept faith in Sarfaraz and retained him for Rs.1.75 crore at the January 2018 auction. Finally, a wiser Naushad brought Sarfaraz back to Mumbai in 2018, but he had to sit out the cooling-off period to be eligible to play in 2019-20.

The Sarfaraz of 2020 is vastly different from the one of 2015. A natural strokeplayer, he has learned to curb his instincts in red-ball cricket and justified selectors’ decision to pick him with three centuries, including a brilliant triple century against Uttar Pradesh – 301 not out (391 balls, 30x4, 8x6). His stupendous Ranji sequence reads: 8, 71 n.o., 36, 301 n.o., 226 n.o., 78, 25, 177, and 6 -- 928 runs at a stratospheric average of 154.66.

Former India wicket-keeper Kiran More was impressed too. “Sarfaraz is an exceptional talent. This season is a game changer for him. He has gone through hell, so he’ll now be prepared to take on any challenge…. He’s definitely India material,” More tells Outlook.

Naushad, who motivates his sons by reading couplets from famous ghazals, says the turnaround is due to a change in Sarfaraz’s approach. “For example, he used to dread getting out in the slips. Now he doesn’t, as he chooses his strokes and tries to play the ball along the ground,” he says.

Sarfaraz, rather nonchalantly, describes his game thus: “While playing red ball cricket I try to be patient. If you stay at the pitch, you would know what shots to play. I play my natural game in white ball cricket. But, even in longer versions, after completing a century I switch to my natural game. Simple.”

It was, of course, not simple -- not just for injury-hit Sarfaraz, but also for Musheer and Naushad. The MCA had handed its under-16 captain Musheer, who was yet to turn 14, a three-year ban for ‘indiscipline’ during a Vijay Merchant Trophy match against UP in January 2019. “I expected a lot from my sons, that’s why I went into depression. When Sarfaraz came back from UP, I got depressed as I wondered about his career after his cooling-off period -- will Mumbai pick him again?” confesses an emotional Naushad.

Sarfaraz slew all doubts with his prolific bat. The icing on the cake was left-arm spinner Musheer capturing 30 wickets at a miserly average of 9.36 in the under-16 Vijay Merchant Trophy on his comeback after his ban was reduced to 11 months following an apology. The diminutive tweaker, who turned 15 on February 27, bagged two 10-wicket match hauls -- one in the final against Punjab--in four matches to propel Mumbai to the title triumph. Overall, he captured three five-wicket hauls, and scored 125 runs. In the under-19 Cooch Behar Trophy, he scored 84 runs and took a solitary wicket in two matches, as Mumbai lost to Vidarbha in semis in which he scored a fine 57.

During their period of crisis last year, Naushad, a former cricketer, took his sons to play matches in Bangalore, Hyderabad, Moradabad, Meerut, Mau and Azamgarh, to keep their hands in. “It was a tough period, but a popular couplet of Nida Fazli inspired me: Safar mein dhoop toh hogi jo chal sako to chalo, sabhi hain bheed mein, tum bhi nikal sako to chalo, yahan kisi ko koi rasta nahi deta, mujhe girake agar tum sambhal sako to chalo (there will be heat and roadblocks in the journey; you venture out if you can withstand these hurdles),” he recites.

Both Sarfaraz and Musheer had to seek psychiatric help. In 2011, when a Mumbai school wrongfully, and unsuccessfully, accused Sarfaraz of age manipulation, he slipped into depression, and Naushad had taken him to a psychiatrist. Last year, Musheer also saw a psychiatrist in Mumbai, before coming out stronger. “Depression is the single largest illness in the world that hits every social stratum. We’ve to recognise mental health in sports to help athletes bounce back,” Dr Samir Parikh of Delhi’s Fortis Healthcare tells Outlook.

About his last year’s cooling-off period, Sarfaraz says, “I knew the opportunity would come, and for that I’d have to be prepared. During that period, I got to understand and know myself.” Their troubles now a distant cloud, Sarfaraz and Musheer are well on their way.

(I wrote this story after the end of the 2019-20 Indian domestic cricket season, which was a very successful one for Sarfaraz Khan and his younger brother Musheer, a promising left-arm spinner)

HOW THE INDIAN GOVERNMENT IS STRATEGICALLY SILENT ON BRINGING BCCI UNDER RTI ACT, LETTING THE BOARD'S EMPLOYEES RUN THE DOMESTIC CRICKET

By QAISER MOHAMMAD ALI, Outlook magazine, issue August 13, 2018

FOR several years, the central government has been making an effort to bring the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, like all National Sports Federations (NSFs). But the Board has been steadfastly, even audaciously, stonewalling the government, thanks to the full backing of politicians who have been -- and still are -- part of it. Successive dispensations, too, have never really been serious about implementing it.

While defying government RTI orders with disdain, the main thrust of BCCI’s defiance—and on which it has been harping unashamedly—has been that it doesn’t take financial assistance from the government. That is only partly true, as it does take indirect, ‘substantial assistance’, as the Delhi High Court observed some years ago and something the Union sports ministry, too, keeps insisting. And, crucially, the men who are the foundational support to the superstructure of BCCI-run tournaments—match officials who run things on the ground—are employees of government institutions.

It’s a matter on which the BCCI conveniently, and consistently, keeps mum. This April, The Law Commission of India (LCI) in a report prepared on directions of the Supreme Court, recommended that the RTI Act be made applicable to the BCCI and all its state affiliates. In addition, the Supreme Court has concluded, in the famous ‘BCCI versus Netaji Cricket Club (Chennai)’ case of 2005—and even in the Zee Telefilms vs Union of India case—that the Board “exercises enormous public functions” and “state-like functions”. These include selection of national teams that are fielded in global tournaments, with players/officials wearing the Indian national logo using the word ‘India’, which is part of the Emblem Act. 

The main governmental assistance to the BCCI comes in the form of heavily subsidised land provided for constructing stadiums, income tax/customs exemption—between 1997 and 2007, the government gave an exemption of Rs 2,168 crore—and civic/security services etc.. “Whenever the BCCI faced difficulty in obtaining customs duty exemption it approached this ministry, seeking a certificate that announced it is a recognised NSF for cricket. The ministry has issued such certificates in favour of the BCCI,” the Union sports ministry in December 2011 said in its reply to the Central Information Commission (CIC), supporting an application that had sought that the BCCI be declared a ‘public authority’ under the RTI Act.

However, strangely and surprisingly, while listing the assistance it provides to the BCCI, the government never highlighted the most important support it provides—match officials. They conduct various domestic tournaments and are thus the pillars, as well as the nuts and bolts, without which the entire BCCI edifice would collapse. Had the sports ministry in its various reports/replies to Parliament questions raised this point, the BCCI would have been defenceless. A case could thus have been built for it to come under the RTI ambit and share information, particularly financial, that it fiercely shields.

Two top sports ministry officials who handled the BCCI-RTI Act issue during sports minister Lalit Maken’s short tenure in 2011-2012 now candidly admit to have erred in overlooking this vital aspect. “Yes, we didn’t realise this at the time. If we had flagged this issue with the BCCI, it would have been better because the Board benefited from these umpires and scorers etc. who are actually government employees,” one official tells Outlook. The other concurred with his colleague’s views. 

So, who are these match officials and how are they so important for the BCCI? They are umpires, referees, scorers, and video analysts—and, in many instances, even coaches and players. A significant number of them are government employees who double up as cricket officials during the domestic cricket season in winter after taking legitimate/special leave from their offices. 

Veritably, the number of match officials —all freelancers, trained by the BCCI—is colossal. The BCCI uses close to 500 match officials—the world’s largest such contingent—comprising umpires, referees, scorers and video analysts. Of 97 umpires and 58 match referees, the people who conduct matches, a substantial number are government employees. Besides, there are many referees, scorers and video analysts who work in various government institutions, mainly banks. 

It’s surprising how long the roster is—the Reserve Bank of India, State Bank of India, Comptroller and Attorney General, Dena Bank, Canara Bank, Vijaya Bank, Oriental Bank Corporation, Punjab National Bank, Indian Railways, Services, Indian Oil, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation, Food Corporation of India, Income Tax Department, Accountant General, India Post, BSNL, and Life Insurance Corporation. 

Although the BCCI is the world’s richest cricket body, it cannot employ nearly 500 officials permanently, simply because they wouldn’t have anything to do in the off season. It makes business sense for the BCCI to hire them professionally, only during the domestic season. The question here is not whether government employees can conduct BCCI matches; they are free to pursue their passion. The issue is of dogged resistance by the Board to become accountable and transparent under the RTI Act. But, as the ministry officials admitted, the government has itself to blame for giving the BCCI a long rope. If it sincerely wanted to force the BCCI, it could have told it something like this: ‘Look, you are heavily dependent on us in many areas. If you don’t come under the RTI Act, we would not grant leave to our employees to work in your tournaments as match officials.’ 

Indeed, government employees take leave to officiate in matches. Of course, some banks are aware of what their employees do, but still sportingly oblige their employees, and indirectly, the BCCI. “I worked for 28 years with Syndicate Bank in Bangalore, before retiring in 2008. My bank was very cooperative in granting leave within the rules so that I could officiate in matches. I would attach the BCCI letter of assignment while applying for leave,” Shavir Tarapore, a former ICC International Panel umpire and ex-Karnataka cricketer, tells Outlook. 

It is said that due to his insistence on BCCI coming under the RTI Act, the Congress-led UPA government removed Maken in October 2012, after barely 20 months in office. It must be remembered that at the time, influential Congress party ministers Jyotiraditya Scindia and Rajeev Shukla, along with the BJP’s Arun Jaitley called the shots in the BCCI. They also headed three of the Board’s state affiliates. Over the years, whenever it has come to shielding the BCCI from becoming accountable, politicians have joined hands to scotch all such attempts. 

Also, a few RTI activists have over the years tried, though unsuccessfully, to eke out information, particularly about finances, from the BCCI. Besides, some people allege that the BCCI even “bought out” some RTI activists who wanted it to be declared a ‘public authority’. Such talk gained ground when they often failed to appear before the CIC when summoned. 

As the blockbuster 2018-19 domestic cricket season, comprising a whopping 2,017 matches, is set to start on August 13, there are apprehensions about the BCCI managing to deploy umpires, referees, scorers and video analysts smoothly. Be that as it may, the Board would, for the umpteenth time, bank heavily on banks and other government institutions for the indispensable match officials. Freely partaking of the government’s beneficence, the BCCI quails only when the issue of its coming under the RTI umbrella arises.

DELOITTE AUDIT REPORT EXPOSES FINANCIAL MESS IN BCCI AFFILIATES (EXCLUSIVE, Part 2 of 2)

The commissioned report exposes large scale irregularities in accounts books of the state cricket associations affiliated to the BCCI

By QAISER MOHAMMAD ALI, www.Outlookindia.com

BCCI headquarters at the Wankhede Stadium, Mumbai. 

New Delhi, March 8, 2017: The damning Deloitte audit report, which has exposed widespread financial irregularities inside the BCCI’s affiliate associations, seems to be having its desired effect.

The Supreme Court-appointed Committee of Administrators (CoA) has taken a note of the scathing report, accessed by Outlook, and is said to be mulling action after getting to know the scale of the financial irregularities mentioned in the tell-all individual reports of each state association.

A team of auditors from Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu gave the CoA, headed by former CAG Vinod Rai and comprising finance expert Vikram Limaye, MD and CEO of IDFC Ltd., a presentation a couple of weeks ago in Delhi.

Being experts at number crunching, Rai, who during his tenure as CAG had disclosed both the Coalgate and 2G Scams a few years ago, and Limaye naturally looked beyond the black-and-white text and tried reading between the lines in the Deloitte reports. They as well as their two other committee colleagues -- noted historian and never-say-die cricket fan Ramchandra Guha and former India women’s captain Diana Edulji -- felt there was still more to it that had found its way into the report.

Sources close to the CoA say what made them take the report with a pinch of salt was the auditors’ negative remarks against almost all the associations who did not cooperate with the special team constituted to undertake the first-of-its-kind, pan-India exercise. These associations essentially stonewalled their bid to dig out the truth about their financial dealings. Prominent among the units that refused to cooperate fully include Jharkhand, Orissa, Assam, Gujarat, and Goa.

In their multiple reports, the auditors have mentioned that associations either refused to show them the relevant contracts, fixed deposit receipts, documents, MoUs, bills, vouchers, receipts etc. or they were not available. They also emphasise that many associations are not maintaining the fixed assets register – mandatory for every big organisation – or wrote accounts books with a pencil or accepted bills presented on plain paper or favoured their known ones in tender process. In several instances, the auditors noted the differences in the amounts of money that the BCCI has given associations and what they claim to have received.

For example, the auditors point out the bizarre act of overruling duly audited accounts by the Gujarat Cricket Association. “The audited financial statements duly signed by office-bearers was superseded subsequently with a correct version due to an inadvertent error in the balance sheet resulting in certain differences in the older version.”

It is learned that even as the CoA studies the report, it is not entirely happy with what it has in its hands. Considering the associations’ instances of defiance mentioned above, there is thinking among some members of the committee, that it would be prudent to conduct a fresh audit of the state associations.

While the other CoA members are not speaking to the media, Guha made an exception to make a general comment on the Deloitte report. “We have seen the report. A presentation has been made to us by Deloitte. There are multiple reports. We are aware of the situation and we will try and do the best we can,” Guha tells Outlook, stressing that he too has taken a decision to not to speak on his committee’s decisions.

If the CoA members, who are in no hurry to implement the reforms as they would like to do a good job of the responsibility given, eventually decide to order a fresh audit of the associations, they would have a solid, valid reason. In this context, it is crucial to note that former BCCI president Shashank Manohar’s order of the audit in October 2015 was his own initiative – and that is what the CoA may also point out.

There was no order from any court to do so, though at the time the BCCI was under the Supreme Court hammer and had coping with the public wrath for its mismanagement, particularly in financial matters. Manohar wanted to cleanse the opaque system. Under the circumstances, it was perhaps the best step that he could take in his bid to make the state officials transparent and accountable, and restore the BCCI’s image somewhat.

But Manohar then left the BCCI and became ICC chairman. The circumstances changed quickly, and soon the Supreme Court debarred president Anurag Thakur, who had since replaced Manohar, and secretary Ajay Shirke in January. While the BCCI’s entire focus was now on saving its own skin in the Supreme Court, there was no one to take action on the Deloitte report.

Therefore, it is only natural for the CoA to study the report and probably take action. It is important to note that his committee has the mandate of the Supreme Court to govern until the Lodha Committee recommendations are implemented in the BCCI and its affiliates, followed by elections. Thus, it has enough powers and it has taken complete command of the Board, as seen in its several directives to the state associations, including seeking information on their qualified/disqualified administrators.

Since the committee derives its strength from the highest court of the country, it thus has the power to order a fresh audit. Its present priority, however, will obviously be to ensure that the ongoing Test series with Australia is conducted smoothly – and there’s no repeat of the Pune pitch fiasco – and the high-stake IPL in April-May.

 During all this, the committee is taking a hard look at Deloitte report and may take a decision on whether it should go for a re-audit, say sources. After all, the reforms will start from the state associations, which are members as well as the electorate of the BCCI. If the administration in states is not in order, transparent, and implement the Lodha Committee-drafted constitution reforms can’t take place in true sense.

“It [contents of the audit report] may be just the tip of the iceberg. Maybe a lot of the material that’s really relevant was not divulged to the Deloitte audit team. There may a good chance that re-audit may be ordered. That it would be in order. A lot of people have been asking for it,” said the source aware of the developments. “After all, Vinod Rai is an expert in this field – auditing. If he feels there are loopholes somewhere or some other things need to be probed he may ask for it.” And, as seen by Outlook, there are indeed many grey areas stressed in the Deloitte reports.

One of the root causes of the state associations’ ‘I-don’t-give-a-damn’ attitude towards financial matters, including maintenance of account books, is that the BCCI never tried to make them accountable for the huge grants/funds they have been doling out year after year (see the graphic alongside), particularly since the advent of the lucrative IPL in 2008. All this is due to the Board’s vote politics and a majority of former office-bearers’ keenness to perpetuate their reins. This, despite giving huge amounts to its affiliates over the years.

It was only after the Supreme Court took a tough stand over this issue and asked the BCCI to furnish details of the money it had distributed to the states and how the states have spent it that the Board asked the associations to get the audit done on their own (the Deloitte audit was ordered separately). Earlier, a majority of officials in the associations had been splurging the money the way they wanted, many times on themselves, as is enumerated by the Deloitte report.

While trying to impress upon the Supreme Court that the BCCI had been taking a tough stand against its affiliates vis-à-vis financial accountability, former BCCI secretary Anurag Thakur in a sworn affidavit, submitted in May 2016, actually ended up admitting that some states had not been getting their accounts audited. In his affidavit, he cited the Gujarat Cricket Association (GCA), headed by BJP president Amit Shah, as an example.

“If not submitted, the disbursement is withheld until such submission. For example, disbursements to the GCA were withheld in FY 2011-12 and FY 2012-13 due to non-submission of audited accounts. However, once it submitted is (sic) audited accounts, Rs.86.66 crore (being its aggregate entitlement for FY 2011-12, FY 2012-13 and FY 2013-14) was disbursed to it in FY 2013-14,” said Thakur. However, Gujarat alone is not guilty; there are many of its ilk that get away with murder, so to say.

Despite the Supreme Court and the CoA wielding the stick, some officials and associations are still trying their best to impede the impending reforms by taking legal recourse. Many of them have moved applications in the Supreme Court, basically on two issues: the supposed confusion over administrators’ tenure (whether it is nine years each at the BCCI and the states, or nine years altogether), and the fear that ICC chairman Manohar’s bid to treat all member countries at par would significantly reduce BCCI’s share from the ICC. The next hearing in the Supreme Court is on March 27.

Those in favour of reforms charge that certain officials’ worry over likely reduced share from ICC is a “put on” act and is actually a bid to prolong their rule by taking attention away from the main issue – reforms in Indian cricket.

“BCCI officials keep saying that if the ICC pays India less, players would suffer. But most people don’t know – not even the players, perhaps – that not even a penny that comes from the ICC is shared with players. So whether or not BCCI gets more money or less from the ICC, it would make no difference to players,” said an official.

“For example, when the Champions League Twenty20 tournament was discontinued in 2015 the BCCI received a compensation of Rs.1,607.58 crore from the broadcasters STAR Sports. Not a penny of this money was shared with players. Both the public and players have to understand all these things,” he pointed out. “Why doesn’t the BCCI include the income from the IPL and ICC’s distribution as part of the 26 per cent of the gross revenue that it shares with players?”

Currently, the 26 per cent players’ share only includes income from media/TV rights and jersey logo deal.

This ICC issue is closely linked with the reforms in the BCCI and its affiliates. The ICC is expected to take a final decision in April, but the implementation of reforms in India may take many more months, going by the pace at which this Supreme Court case has been progressing and the state associations trying to take legal recourse to, as many experts allege, delay implementing the Lodha Committee’s recommendations. Until these cases get disposed of quickly, uncertainty will continue to affect Indian cricket.

Below are some of highlights of the Deloitte Audit Report (the figures against the state associations’ names, in parenthesis, are the amounts they received from BCCI between 2010-11 and 2014-15, as per a BCCI affidavit submitted in Supreme Court):

Baroda (Rs.154.92 crore)

n Land at Kotambi purchased for Rs.13.95 crore from seller who himself purchased the property just a month before for Rs.10.95 crore.

n Advance of Rs.4.17 crore paid for buying land at Sarkarda at risk; litigation is on.

n Memorabilia worth Rs.96 lakhs in silver coins issued to all 2,300 members.

Uttar Pradesh (Rs.123.52 crore)

n Rs. 21.52 crore, including Rs.3 crore for proposed building, spent in acquiring land in Unnao, near Kanpur, for a stadium. Now, UPCA plans to sell it.

n UPCA took Green Park Stadium on a 30-year lease at a yearly rent of Rs.1 crore, but the state government too is using it.

n No practice of inviting open tenders, awarding purchase/service contracts.

Haryana (Rs.120.65 crore)

n Close to its Lahli stadium, 21.06 acres land bought for Rs.10.74 crore (@ Rs.51.01 lakh/acre while in 2013-14 the collector rate was Rs.25 lakh/acre) between 2010-2014 for another stadium.

n Land in Sultanpur, Yakubpur, Sondhi and Beed in Haryana purchased at a premium of 50%-230% over collector rates and exchanged with Reliance Haryana SEZ’s 9.84-acre land in Lohat.

Jharkhand (Rs.196.23 crore)

n Non-refundable Rs.15.85 crore premium paid for leasehold land in Ranchi not being amortized over the lease period.

n Heavy Engineering Corporation Limited sub-leased 31.70 acres land in Ranchi to JSCA for a stadium for a Rs.15.85 crore premium. HECL now wants to evict JSCA as it wants to build a star hotel inside the stadium; litigation on.

Kerala (Rs.176.16 crore)

n Rs.27.08 crore spent on purchasing 23.65-acre marshy mangrove land in Edakochi in 2009-10 for building a stadium. Case is in the High Court.

n Rs.3.36 crore spent on purchasing land in Thodupuzha. It’s under litigation.

n Rs.85 lakh paid to United Kingdom’s architectural firm Hopkins without formal agreement.

Orissa (Rs.186.64 crore)

n Rs.2.38 crore loss to OCA Club since its inception in 2013-14.

n Rs.3.5 lakh worth of 70 tonnes organic manure purchased every month from Indian Plant Seeds for Barabati Stadium/gardens, no utilisation records maintained.

n Rs.5.41 crore deficit in organising men’s and women’s tournaments, despite reimbursements by the BCCI.

Hyderabad (Rs.156.67 crore)

n At least Rs.114.95 crore worth of financial irregularities from 2000-2012 alleged by Anti Corrpution Bureau.

n Rs.2.03 crore demand from the electricity department for electricity theft.

n Land in Mehboobnagar and Nizamabad purchased for Rs.1.51 crore for constructing stadiums, but IT Dept attached them in 2015-16 for not paying tax.

Goa (Rs.141.30 crore)

n Fixed assets, including a ground at Sanguem, capitalised at Rs 6.2 crore, mired in controversy.

n Alleged misappropriation of Rs.2.87 crore received from BCCI between 2006-2008.

n Rs.4.47 crore paid to Uday Joshi & Asso on design & consultancy; work not shown to auditors.

n Officials spent Rs.43 lakh on watching IPL games in 2014-15 under ‘Cricket Promotion Expenses’.

Gujarat (Rs.157.23 crore)

n GCA purchased cricket balls (Rs.42.45 lakh) and staff uniform (Rs.1.73 lakh) from two firms in which officials were “interested” in (2012-13 to 2015-16).

n Audited financial statements for 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 not provided and AGMs not held. Office-bearers’ term had expired in 2011-12.

n Significant IT demand of Rs.37 crore from 2006-07 to 2012-13.

Himachal Pradesh (Rs.134.28 crore)

n HPCA, a society, changed to a company on Oct 1, 2012, but it had registered a company with exactly same acronym (Himalayan Players Cricket Asso) was incorporated in 2005. After becoming a company, HPCA became Himachal Pradesh Cricket Association.

n Total tax demand of Rs.18 crore pending, but no provision or entry is made in the books.

Saurashtra (Rs.158.89 crore)

n Transactions with association members and their family: Rs.84,000 ex-gratia, Rs.66,000 for mobile phone, Rs.85,000 for mobile bill for 2014-15 and car along with petrol expenses amounting to Rs.14 lakh given to secretary Niranjan Shah.

 

Assam (Rs.216.15 crore)

n Contract for Barsapara Stadium floodlights given for Rs.9.87 crore; actual cost was Rs.12 crore. It got a Rs.6.50 crore loan @ 9.25% against two fixed deposits (maturity value Rs.8.47 crore) for paying Service Tax (Rs.3.30 crore) and contractors (Rs.3.20 crore).

Bengal (Rs.224.18 crore)

n Non-payment of Eden Gardens lease rentals for four years is Rs.3.24 crore while Rs.66 lakh was spent on celebration of 199th Test of Sachin Tendulkar in 2013-14 and Rs.58 lakh on 150th anniversary of the stadium.

Tamil Nadu (Rs.193.42 crore)

n Lease of Chennai’s Chepauk Stadium pending renewal, after the 20-year lease expired on April 19, 2015. Additional lease rental demand of Rs.28.99 crore received by the TNCA for Chepauk. Three stands (12,000 seats) of Chepauk sealed for being constructed without CMDA’s permission.

Mumbai (Rs.191.57 crore)

n 19 Corporate Boxes at Wankhede Stadium, Mumbai, allotted without tender process. MCA offers subsidised tickets to Garware Club House, which can charge their members extra. Rs.1 crore donated to Mahrashtra CM’s drought relief fund, though there’s no such provision in its bye-laws.

Maharashtra (Rs.183.89 crore)

n Rs.64 lakh spent on guard dog services and Rs.26 lakh to contractors for house-keeping services without tenders/evaluation. 
n No written contracts defining roles for 30 contractors/consultants and 12 employees.

Karnataka (Rs.183.57 crore)

n Rs.2.03 crore incurred on software not in use. It includes the ERP/cricketing software/cognitive e-play software. 
n Association spent Rs.1.21 crore for telecasting Platinum Jubilee celebrations.

Punjab (Rs.178.14 crore)

n Fixed deposits of Rs.15 crore in the name of president and treasurer. 
n Punjab and Chandigarh police’s bill of Rs.31.64 crore is being contested. 
n Post facto approval of Rs.1 crore paid to Punjab State Cancer and Drug Addiction Treatment Infra Fund.

Delhi (Rs.163.60 crore)

n DDCA’s most controversial project is Ferozeshah Kotla Stadium’s renovation. The initial contract was of Rs.24 crore in 2004, but cost has escalated to approx. Rs.141 crore without the stadium being complete, still.

Madhya Pradesh (Rs.158.08 crore)

n Purchase of 12.43 hectares of land at various rates, ranging from Rs.30 lakh to Rs.2 crore per hectare.

n Income Tax has imposed Rs.490 lakh penalty. 
n Rs.18.44 lakh spent on 100th birthday celebrations of late cricketers CS Nayudu, MM Jagdale and Syed Mushtaq Ali.

Vidarbha (Rs.150.25 crore)

n VCA Club House has made a loss of Rs.5.82 crore in the last three years. 
n Significant amount of off balance-sheet exposures (service tax and police bandobast): Rs. 21.48 crore on March 31, 2015.

Tripura (Rs.106.01 crore)

n Contrary to its bye-laws, Rs.148.37 crore kept in fixed deposits with state co-operative and gramin banks. 
n The association paid, under protest, only Rs.2.61 crore out of Rs.7.11 crore Income Tax demand in 2012-13.

Rajasthan (Rs.118.67 crore)

n An ad-hoc body is managing the RCA affairs after suspending the body for electing suspended Lalit Modi its president on May 6, 2014. Since then cricketers have been most hit while BCCI has stopped funds.

Andhra (Rs.139.83 crore)

n Spent Rs.3.06 crore on its Diamond Jubilee Celebrations in 2014 while 100 silver mementos worth Rs.27 lakh distributed without receipt information. 
n NGT imposed Rs.96.40 lakh fine for cutting trees.

Jammu and Kashmir (Rs.36.83 crore)

n Some former J&KCA office-bearers facing inquiry for alleged misappropriation of Rs.24.64 crore (A PIL filed in the state has put the figure at around Rs.40 crore). A case is on in the High Court.

n Currently, the state sports minister heads J&KCA, defying Lodha panel’s recommendations.

Chhatisgarh (Rs.10.01 crore)

Railways (Rs.5.52 crore)

Services (Rs.4.92 crore)

Meghalaya (Rs.2.52 crore)

Cricket Club of India (Rs.2.11 crore)

Sikkim (Rs.0.62 crore)

Nagaland (Rs.0.04 crore)

Manipur (Rs.0.02 crore)

Source: Deloitte Audit Report and a BCCI affidavit in Supreme Court. Bihar, National Cricket Club, and Arunachal Pradesh did not receive funds from 2010-11 to 2014-15, as per the BCCI affidavit.