New Delhi: Since the talks of implementation of the Lodha Committee reforms, the 'one state one vote' clause has been a bone of contention between the state associations and the Committee of Administrators (CoA). On 1 May, after many deliberations, the Supreme Court has agreed to reconsider the clause, stating that 'historic roles' of the state cricket associations cannot be ignored, as per a report published in Times of India.
Not to forget that on 18 July, 2016, the Supreme Court had accepted the 'one state one vote' recommendation, eventually relegating the state bodies to associate members, who would no further enjoy the voting rights apart from the benefit of voting on a rotation basis for state associations in Gujarat and Maharashtra.
The Supreme Court also said that BCCI must not be too restrictive with the eligibility criteria of the selectors, saying that it is not necessary for the number of selectors to be three and that they must have played Test cricket. The apex court gave examples of Padmakar Shivalkar and Rajinder Goel, who never played Test cricket for India but come with a massive experience.
CoA had requested the Supreme Court for fresh elections of BCCI office bearers in its seventh status report. The committee also wanted to hold an AGM without the adoption of the new constitution. However, the SC ruled that no state cricket association has the right to uphold elections until the BCCI comes up with a constitution.