MATCH REPORTS
STAT SHEET
DIARY
OTHER SPORTS
SLIDE SHOW
PEOPLE
DEAR REDIFF

From Inderjit, with anything but love...

The first BCCI general body meeting for this year was held in Madras on September 25. Chaos and confusion reigned, and the meeting was adjourned. Four days later, former BCCI president Inderjit Singh Bindra sent a letter to his successor, Raj Singh Dungarpur. We reproduce the contents:

"I am writing this letter with a deep sense of anguish, a feeling of personal hurt and veritable sense of shock and disbelief, in the manner in which the last AGM was conducted. These feelings have been further aggravated by the subsequent happenings, including the press briefing done by Mr J Y Lele, Secretary, BCCI, after the meeting.

"You may recollect that during the course of the abandoned meeting, I had spoken to you during the many short adjournments, about the glorious traditions of the Board and the role played by the past presidents who have always been treated in high esteem and dignity by all members, even at times when the Board was vertically divided into two groups. Even at those times the presidents had always acted impartially, objectively, and in a fair manner.

"During my 22 years of association with the Board, at no point of time has the office of president been accused of being subjective. You will recall that during the last 20 years, three elections were fiercely contested and in some cases, won with the slimmest of majorities but at no point were the glorious traditions, conventions of the Board and rules of fair play and objectivity given a go-by. N K P Salve was elected at Bangalore and at that time the Board was vertically divided. Mr Salve, with his esteemed leadership, rare objectivity and deep sense of fair play, helped in cementing the cracks and schisms and, during his tenure, the Board was totally united. Those three years were a glorious chapter in the annals of the Board, the biggest milestone being the victory in the World Cup at Lord's in 1983, allotment of the Reliance World Cup and its subsequent conduct and the effective and meaningful role played by India in the corridors of the International Cricket Council.

"After Mr Salve, Mr Scindia's elevation as Board president was again preceeded by an extremely bitter campaign, a fairly contested election and a debate on the floor of the AGM that was at times highly acrimonious. However, after these elections, Mr Scindia also carried all sections with him and provided tremendous leadership and the Board became a cohesive unit. Mr Scindia succeeded in bringing the World Cup to the sub-continent for the second time in a decade. Also during that period, India successfully created a solid block of like-minded members of the ICC and was successful in the democratisation of the ICC and repealing of some of the antiquated, outdated, feudal and colonial provisions relating to veto etc. in the ICC constitution. It was due to his efforts that the first democratically elected chairman of the ICC was installed.

"In November 1993, when I took over at Gwalior, again there was a keenly contested election. Even though I may not have provided the kind of leadership which my predecessors had, yet in my humble way I succeeded in carrying the entire Board together. With the support and commitment of all members, we achieved reasonable success in terms of innovative marketing and the spread of the game and, in 1996, we handed over to you at Mohali a Board which was vibrant, united, and transparent in all its dealings. Mohali witnessed unanimous elections -- a true vindication of its unity.

"During the last one year you have, for reasons best known to you, allowed the situation to deteriorate to the extent of an impasse in the AGM. This was one of the saddest days in the history of the Board.

"Your rulings in respect of representatives of two member associations, namely Railways and Jammu and Kashmir, were to say the least totally subjective, arbitrary, contraryy to the provisions of the rules and regulations of the Board and against all established conventions. In the case of Mr Balkar Singh (Railways), he was duly nominated by the president and was, besides, the secretary and was totally competent to represent Railways in the AGM. You had categorically stated that in case he gives in writing that he is duly nominated by Railways to attend the meeting, you would allow him to represent the member association. When he gave the same in writing, to our utter shock and disbelief you changed your ruling and declared that the person nominated by the vice president would represent the Railways.

A large number of members had pointed out the inherent contradictions; the apparent illegalities and the likely consequences that would flow from your arbitrary ruling. It was pointed out that in case the vice presidents from respective associations could nominate, it would lead to chaos with multiple nominations -- thereby creating impossible situations which would jeopardise cohesion and unity of the Board and its administrative structure. It would also lead to ridiculous consequences whereby the electoral college comprising the representatives of the various member associations could be manipulated by the chairman of the meeting to suit his convenience or the convenience of his faction or group. It was all the more unfortunate because you had declared your candidature for the post of president in the group meeting held the previous day.

A greater shock was reserved for us in terms of your ruling in respect of the representative from Jammu and Kashmir. Whereas in the first case you had said that the letter from the association vice president could nullyfy the authority given by the president and conferred by the constitution/rules and regulations of the Railway Sports Board, in the second case you gave a ruling to the effect that since two authority letters were issued, one by Mr Farooq Abdullah, President Jammu and Kashmir in favour of Mr Ajat Shatru and the other by the Secretary in favour of Mr Drabu, both could attend the meeting.

For casting of vote in case of subsequent vote you ruled that both representatives would have the right to vote and that their votes would be kept in a sealed cover. This ruling was not only in contravention of the rules and regulations of the Board, the regulations governing administration of J & K Cricket Association but was totally contradictory to your own earlier ruling in respect of the representative of Railways. In the first case, you authorised the representative nominated by the vice president to attend even though the secretary was totally authorsed in terms of the constutition of the Railway Sports Board. You over-ruled all the arguments made by a large number of members on the floor of the AGM and gave an arbitrary ruling. We had requested that in both cases the votes should be kept in a sealed cover so as to have consistency in the two rulings. Subsequently, after two hours of heated discussion, good sense and wisdom prevailed upon you and you overruled your earlier ruling and allowed Mr Ajat Shatru to attend and vote at the meeting. In respect of the Railways representative, however, you persisted with your arbitrary and totally illegal ruling which may well create a precedent which will eventually make the working of the Board impossible.

"The news item appearing in the next day's newspapers based on the official statement given by secretary Mr J Y Lele further compounded the shocking state of affairs by giving a totally erroneous and distorted version of what actually took place in the meeting, both in respect of your ruling pertaining to representative from J & K and Railways and also in respect of circumstances leading to postponement of the meeting on grounds of notice being in contravention of the rules and regulations of the Board.

"When notice for the meeting was read, I got up and raised an objection that the minutes which had been circulated along with the notice had not been approved by me in my capacity as the then president and chairman of the last AGM held on 25th and 26th September 1996 at Mohali.

"At this point of time some members sought a short adjournment to enable them to go through the minutes which were tabled only after I had raised the objection. A strong objection was taken to this by one of the vice presidents and efforts were made to should down the representatives who had sought a short adjournment. When the request for the short adjournment was turned down, I had got up and said that even though technically, notice for the meeting was defective, in the interest of the smooth working of the Board and its public image and resulting complications, we did not wish to raise technical points. At this point of time Mr Dalmiya representing the Cricket Association of Bengal specifically sought postponement on the ground that the notice was illegal and that a fresh clear 21-day notice needed to be issued. In the official briefing as appeared in the newspapers, Mr Lele has tried to confuse the issue and even gone to the extent of saying that a large number of members had sought abandonment whereas actually, a brief adjournment had been sought.

"While postponing the meeting, it was categorically stated that the meeting would be reconvened within the shortest possible time by giving 21 days clear notice. It was also decided that the actual date will be between Dussera and Deepawali.

"Subsequently Mr Lele in a statement from Mumbai has stated that the meeting will be held some time in November. This is not only contrary to what had been decided at the time of postponing the meeting at Chennai on 21st September 1997, but is also against the interest of the Board and the member associations. The motives for such an act will be obviously suspect. Mr Lele has already received the duly approved minutes on 23rd September 1997 and if he had issued the notice on 24th, the meeting could have been convened by 15th October 1997 as was intended at Chennai. I see no reason why the meeting could not have been convened between Dussehra and Deepawali. Postponing it beyond Deepawali is once again arbitrary and against the interest of the Board and jeopardise its working.

"Technically speaking, after 30th September all office bearers, committees and sub-committees of the board ceased to exist, but we did not wish to create a vacuum in the Board and all members had agreed at the time that until the middle of October, routine decisions may be taken by the concerned committees.

"I therefore request you to please direct the secretary to convene the meeting forthwith by giving 21 days notice. Any delay will not only be contrary to the understanding and the decision arrived at in Chennai but will be totally suspect in the eyes of members and the public at large and could have consequences detrimental to the interests of the board.

"I do hope you take this letter in the spirit in which I have written it. Keeping in view the glorious traditions of the Board, the sancitity of conventions and the pristine heritage, I would request you to correct the distortions and not allow the matter to drift further.

"Keeping in view the gravity of issues involved, I am taking the liberty of endorsing a copy of this letter to all affiliated member associations and all office bearers.

"With regards and best wishes, Yours sincerely, I S Bindra".

Ed's note: Just hours from now, the crucial BCCI AGM will be reconvened, and hopefully, the last act in this drama will be enacted. And as events unfold in Madras, one central fact remains, mysteriously, undiscussed.

Given that the decision at Madras, on September 21, was to reconvene the AGM at the earliest possible -- that is, within 21 days which is the statutory notice period -- why did it take the president and the secretary of the BCCI till November 6 to call the meeting?

"The official explanation was that October was not convenient, as two important religious festivals figure in that month. However, the same two festivals have not hampered the conduct of the Ranji Trophy, not to mention various fund-raising tournaments. And hence, that excuse does not wash.

It is with a view to highlight this aspect of the ongoing imbroglio that we publish, here, Bindra's letter. So that the reader, in his attempt to understand the admittedly inexplicable, may have some background on events relating to the first meeting.