Ravindra Mandrekar moves court against MCA

Ravindra Mandrekar, a Mumbai Cricket Association veteran who represents Gaud Saraswat Cricket Club, had filed a petition on October 14.

Published : Oct 16, 2020 22:25 IST

A representative of a member club of MCA has filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court against MCA (Representative Image).
A representative of a member club of MCA has filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court against MCA (Representative Image).
lightbox-info

A representative of a member club of MCA has filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court against MCA (Representative Image).

A representative of a member club of the Mumbai Cricket Association (MCA) has filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court against MCA, seeking directives to convene the much-delayed annual general meeting and initiate a process to appoint a professional chief executive officer as per the requirements of the Supreme Court-directed administrative reforms in Indian cricket.

Ravindra Mandrekar, a MCA veteran who represents Gaud Saraswat Cricket Club, had filed a petition on October 14. Mandrekar’s petition has appealed to the court to direct the MCA to organise an annual AGM within four weeks, issue a restraining order to extend C.S. Naik’s tenure as CEO and initiate a procedure for appointing his successor.

READ |

The petitioner states he is moving court since “the association is in a disarray and being conducted contrary to the Lodha Committee reforms”.

The petitioner has stated that despite several reminders and attempts, the elected apex council, headed by Vijay Patil, has not convened the AGM for over a year. The petition alleges “lack of transparency in the management” since for the last three years power has been “concentrated in the hands of 17 members of the Apex Council” instead of 312 MCA members. Each of the 17 elected members of the apex council has also been made a party to the petition.

The petition points out that there is an attempt to persist with Naik, whose term is to expire on October 31, as the CEO. “In the absence of an AGM, the general body members are unable to object to the continuance of the CEO, who is not qualified as per the provisions of the Constitution,” the petition states.

Sign in to unlock all user benefits
  • Get notified on top games and events
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign up / manage to our newsletters with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early bird access to discounts & offers to our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide to our community guidelines for posting your comment