The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and all state cricket associations to explain why they should not be governed by the National Sports Governance Act, 2025.
During a hearing on multiple applications submitted by cricket bodies, a bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi, and Justice V. Mohana directed legal counsel representing the BCCI and state units to seek instructions on whether the terms and conditions of service for their office bearers should fall under the newly enforced 2025 legislation.
Instructions Sought On Administrative Framework
The query was raised as part of the apex court’s ongoing proceedings concerning the cricket board, a matter it has been hearing since 2014 through various applications submitted periodically.
Earlier in the litigation, the top court established a committee led by former Chief Justice of India R. M. Lodha to formulate governance reforms, including the drafting of a constitution for the cricket administration. The court subsequently accepted the panel’s recommendations aimed at overhauling the structure, operations, and management of the BCCI.
History Of Tenure Rules And Cooling-Off Periods
Under the constitution initially sanctioned by the Supreme Court, administrators were subject to a mandatory three-year cooling-off period after completing two consecutive three-year terms across either a state association or the BCCI.
In September 2022, the apex court modified those provisions, permitting office bearers to serve continuous tenures of up to 12 years—comprising six years in a state body followed by six years in the national board—before triggering the three-year cooling-off requirement. Under the adjusted rules, an official is allowed to complete two successive terms at the state level and another two consecutive terms within the BCCI prior to taking the mandatory leave.
