The Supreme Court questioned the Amicus Curiae in the BCCI case Gopal Subramaniam and Anil Divanas as to why the list of nine names submitted in a sealed envelope consisted of people over the age of 70. The Lodha Committee, in its recommendations, had suggested that the administrators of the BCCI should not be over the age of 70.
Subramaniam was to submit a list of six persons, as opposed to the nine submitted, who could be appointed as administrators in the BCCI to oversee the implementation of the Lodha Committee proposals, three of whom ought to be cricketers. The apex court further directed Subramaniam and Divan not to make the list public until its decision. BCCI lawyer Kapil Sibal objected to the list submitted by Subramaniam.
The Supreme Court on Friday said that it will announce the names of BCCI administrators on January 24. The Court also modified its earlier ruling relating to the tenure of the office bearers. It said that administrators can serve nine years separately in state associations and the BCCI itself as opposed to the previous maximum of nine years in total.
The Supreme Court had earlier issued guidelines, suggesting that the panel of administrators should not be over the age of 70. Anil Divan and Gopal Subramaniam had been asked by the Supreme Court to assist in nominating persons of impeccable integrity as members of committee of administrators.
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court had sacked BCCI president Anurag Thakur and secretary Ajay Shirke for reportedly hindering the smooth implementation of the Lodha Committee recommendations.
Apart removing Thakur and Shirke from their posts, the court also issued show cause notices to both, asking why contempt and perjury proceedings be not initiated against them. In a July 18 order by the court, most of BCCI office bearer were ineligible to carry on and the Lodha panel had asked the court to remove them.