Institute of Legal and Management Studies

The Supreme Court today(August 12) appointed Justice L. Nageswara Rao, former judge of the Supreme Court, as an Ombudsman of the Bihar Cricket Association ("BCA") to take action against illegal activities of the office bearers. Consequently, it disposed of the matter, remarking that dirty politics is going on in such associations, wasting the public revenue.

A bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan was hearing a special leave petition against the order of the division bench of the Patna High Court, which had set aside an order passed by a single bench directing the appointment of Justice Shaikesh Kumar Singh, former judge of Patna High Court, as Ombudsman.

The single judge, Justice Sandeep Kumar, had held that the Ombudsman was appointed to take care of violation of rules and regulations in the Association. The order was passed in a writ petition filed by then Secretary of the Cricket Association of Bihar, Aditya Prakash Verma. However, this was set aside by acting Chief Justice Ashutosh Kumar and Justice Partha Sarthy, who held that the competent authority for the appointment of the Ombudsman is the Board of Control for Cricket in India ("BCCI").

At the outset, when the Senior Advocate Rajiv Shakdher. representing the petitoner, began his arguments, the Counsel, representing the BCA, challenged the locus of Verma to approach the Court. The Counsel pointed out that Verma has already been removed in 2023.

Countering this, Shakdher pointed out that the Secretary Amit Kumar was removed by the BCA's President and the Treasurer. He pointed out that against the President, there were serious allegations made by a single judge of the High Court on mismanagement. He argued that the division bench did not go into the allegations of coterie made by the single judge, and still overturned the order. Shakdher pressed for the Court to appoint an Ombudsman and put a quietus to the matter.

Justice Pardiwala said: "Your locus is doubtful, Mr Shakdher. You were removed as a Secretary in 2023. You no longer hold the office, then in what capacity are you filing this petition on behalf of Secretary of Bihar Cricket Association? On the date of filing the writ petition, could you said to be the lawful Secretary of the Association? Who authorised to file this petition?...Now, this litigation is more in public interest."

Shakdher replied that only a lawful Ombudsman could have removed the Secretary. He said that he was restored to his position, where BCA's counsel opposed this argument, explaining that there is another Secretary already appointed. On this, Justice Pardiwala commented that there can't be two Secretaries for one association. He asked if BCA could make a statement that they will appoint an Ombudsman in accordance with rules and regulations.

Perusing the petition, Justice Mahadevan pointed out that there is already an Ombudsman, Justice Nawal Kishore, a retired district judge was appointed in 2023 by the annual general meeting. But again in another meeting, the appointment of Justice Paras Nath Roy, retired district judge, was approved. Shakdher contended that Singh's appointment was by the Committee of Management whereas, the rules say that the Ombudsman has to be appointed through an Annual General Meeting.

Considering that there is no clarity on the appointment and to finally put a quietus to the matter, the bench decided to appoint an Ombudsman. Justice Pardiwala said: "All dirty politics, in all these types of associations and you all are wasting the time of the highest Court of the country trying to redress your own personal grievances. What a waste of public revenue, this cricket association, this Ombudsman and all, everything a farce."

Justice Pardiwala also criticised the division bench's order in dictating that the BCCI has the power to appoint the Ombudsman. He said: "Apart from the question of his locus, prima facie Mr. Shakdher is right, what business the division bench had to say that no, no, that appointment is proper."

The Court set aside the appointment of both the Ombudsman and appointed Justice Rao, retired judge of the Supreme Court, as the Ombudsman.

"It appears from the record that this litigation has a chequered history. As an inter-se dispute between the officer bearers of the Bihar Cricket Association. Today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, a preliminary objection came to be raised on behalf of the Respondent that the petitioner, namely Amit Kumar could not have preferred this petition under Article 136 of the Constitution claiming himself to the Secretary of the Bihar Cricket Association. The record reveals that he was removed as the Secretary, after his removal, he changed by way of civil suit. However, the said civil suit came to be withdrawn. We could have declined to entertain the SLP at the instance of Shri Amit Kumar. But having looked into the matter threadbare and in larger interest of the association, we have decided to find a way out.

Our only intention is to ensure the smooth functioning of the Bihar Cricket Association without interference of any external forces or inter-se disputes of the members, etc. The entire debate, as on date, revolves around the appointment of Ombudsman. The learned single judge, while allowing writ petition, appointed Shri Justice Shailesh Kumar Sinha, former judge of Patna High Court. This appointment came to be disturbed by the division bench of the High Court while disposing of the letter patent appeal. The division bench found it fit to direct the BCCI to appoint new Ombudsman. We fail to understand why BCCI was involved in this matter, why BCCI to do with appointment of Ombudsman so far Bihar Cricket Association is concerned.

In such circumstances, and in larger public interest and for smooth and effective functioning of Bihar Cricket Association, we set aside the appointment of both Shri Nawal Kishore Singh and Paras Nath Roy. We in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 142, appoint Justice L. Nageswara Rao, former judge of the Supreme Court to act as Ombudsman of the Bihar Cricket Association. Let both sides have formal meeting with Justice Rao to workout the modalities for the functioning of Bihar Cricket Association. The honorarium to be paid to Justice Rao shall be fixed in consultation with the parties."

Case Details: SECRETARY BIHAR CRICKET ASSOCIATION Vs BIHAR CRICKET ASSOCIATION|SLP(C) No. 21132-21133/2025

Appearances: Senior Advocate Rajiv Shakder, assisted by Advocate on Record Lzafeer Ahmad B F, and Advocates Talib Mustafa, Ahmad Ibrahim, Raksha Agrawal, and Shubham Arun (for Petitioners)