Srinivasan faction raises 10-point objections, Secretary Amitabh skips meeting

Srinivasan faction raises 10-point objections, Secretary Amitabh skips meeting
  • 1
    Share

NEW DELHI: Disgruntled members of the BCCI comprising a few disqualified and several current state unit officials today came together under the leadership of former president N Srinivasan to launch a 10-point salvo against the Committee of Administrators (CoA).
Acting President C K Khanna and treasurer Aniruddh Chaudhry came to meet the members but did nor attend the meeting. The duo left the venue once the meeting started.
While notable participants among the 22 state units included current CAB president Sourav Ganguly (joining on tele-conference), the acting secretary Amitabh Chaudhary (Jharkhand) chose to skip the informal gathering keeping a distance from the aggrieved members.
Ousted former BCCI president Anurag Thakur’s younger brother Arun joined the conference via tele-conference along with CAB secretary Avishek Dalmiya (representing National Cricket Club).
Satyavrat Sheoran (Services), Snehal parikh (Baroda) GS Walia (Punjab), Kapil Malhotra (CCI) were also present.
Gujarat and Odisha couldn’t be connected on Con Call.
Hyderabad’s Sesh Narayan, Goa’s ousted Vinod Phadke and MPCA Secretary Milind Kanmadikar also joined the gathering.
“I am in Ranchi. There are a lot of theories about who belongs to what camps. My absence from the meeting is a proof that I certainly do not belong to any camp. But yes, I am with anybody who is saying the right things,” Amitabh told PTI today.
While N Srinivasan did not make any comments, former secretary Niranjan Shah spoke about how the CoA is taking unilateral decisions without consulting anyone.
They raised 10 issues.
The first point of the press note read: “The tender for media rights of domestic and bilateral games in India, which six years ago was sold for 43 crores per match after much discussion and effort and after following a transparent process, is now being decided only by a two member COA with inputs and briefings from the CEO and the legal team.
They have put a minimum bid value which is lower than the existing value of six years ago.
The Marketing Committee or the members that constitute the General Body of the BCCI were not consulted.
Another issue raised was Diana Edulji getting one-time benefit along with her sister Behroze despite being a member of CoA, which took the policy decision.
It is a matter of great regret that the CoA approved one-time benefit to one of its members and her sister and has failed to disclose this as a transaction with an interested party.
While the CoA pontificates on a number of things, when their interest is involved they are silent.
Without naming anyone, the manner of appointment in senior managerial position (GM Marketing Priya Gupta for example) at exorbitant salaries has been questioned.”
The CoA is appointing people at exorbitant salaries without consulting the members and nobody knows what procedures were followed.
The role of the head hunting agency (Kornferry) was also questioned.
Niranjan Shah has been kept out of the loop regarding all matters related to NCA and he incorporated that point in their list of grouses.
Decisions with regard to the NCA are taken without any consultation or approvals of members or even the NCA committee despite repeated communications requesting to do so.
The NCA is integral to the development of future cricketers and the members have been completely ignored in its planning, development and execution of programs.
The Srinivasan faction also questioned the need for CEO Rahul Johri to hire a personal body guard, allegedly linked with an IPL team owner.
The CEO Mr Johri in consultation with a security consultant got a personal body guard provided to him under the pretext that he was his secretary.
One such bodyguard was recently seen on duty for protection services with an IPL team owner.
By billing the bodyguard under some other head to prevent members knowing about it, Mr Johri in conjunction with the CoA have falsified the accounts,” it stated.
When Rai was asked about this, he refused to comment.
The members also asked the COA “if the ICC has paid the BCCI’s share of revenue for the ICC events that have taken place.
If no, what steps have been taken to recover the share of the BCCI.