Supreme Court questions BCCI’s exclusion from National Sports Governance Act, seeks response

SC Grinds BCCI's Gears on Governance Act — Now the Board Must Explain Why It's Offside

Quick debrief from the tdy hearing: the three-judge bench (CJ Surya Kant, Bagchi & Mohana) just fired the pivotal question at the BCCI and all affiliated state bodies — why should you be carved out of the National Sports Governance Act, 2025?

Here's the play: the court is actively probing whether the cricket board's governance should mirror the regime applied to every other national sport federation. No order passed yet — matter's still pending, but the tone tells you where the umpire's leaning.

The hook for the sharp operators: the bench also directed counsel to pull client instructions on whether office-bearers' terms & conditions of service should fall under the 2025 legislation — which is already in force and already governs office-bearers across other federations. Basically, they're asking if cricket wants to stay the autonomous outlier, and they want it on record.

Context for those who missed the earlier chapters:

- Petition's been running since 2014; Lodha committee framework got bolted on as the reform blueprint.

- Sept 2022 modification relaxed tenure rules — office-bearers can now log 12 continuous years (6 at state + 6 at BCCI level) before the 3-yr cooling-off kicks in. That's a meaningful loosening from the original Lodha structure.

Next move: counsel must file client instructions before the bench. Once that's on record, expect a fresh listing. Watch this space — if SC pulls BCCI under the Act's ambit, it's a structural shift for how cricket's run from the top.

No substantive ruling yet, but the direction of travel is clear. This one's worth tracking.

Source: Crictracker