HIKEN NARESH SHAH Vs. BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER TAMIL NADU SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, HAVING ITS HEADQUARTERS AT CRICKET CENTRE, WANKHEDE STADIUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) Rule. With the consent of the parties, the petition is taken up for final disposal at admission stage.

(3.) The petitioner is objecting to the order passed by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (for short, "BCCI), dated 18.01.2016, thereby imposing a ban on him for a period of five years in respect of playing or representing cricket in any form, or in any way whatsoever, being associated with the activities of the respondentBoard and its affiliates. The petitioner is a professional cricketer and claims to have played 37 first class matches. The respondent is a Board governing sport of cricket in India and also represents the Country in respect of game of cricket and all other forms associated with game at international level. On 16.03.2015, the petitioner received a notice from Anti Corruption Unit (for short, "ACU") of the BCCI, calling upon him to remain present before the ACU authorities on 18.03.2015. According to the petitioner, he called upon the ACU authorities to confirm the reason as to why he has been summoned. The petitioner appeared before the ACU authorities for hearing led by Commissioner Mr. Ravi Sawani. On the same day, he received an email from ACU authorities calling upon him to submit call record in respect of his mobile number 919869995097 for the period between 01.11.20014 to 18.03.2015. The petitioner contends that he received yet another notice by email from ACU calling upon him to remain present for hearing on 28.04.2015. The petitioner was put under suspension from playing all forms of cricket matches held by or under the aegies of the respondentBoard, by an order dated 12.07.2015. The petitioner challenge the said order dated 12.07.2015 by presenting Writ Petition No.2170 of 2015, which came to be dismissed by an order dated 12.08.2015. The Division Bench of this Court did not grant any interim relief revoking suspension. However, considering the affidavit presented on behalf of the respondent that the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner would be completed within the prescribed time limit provided under the Rules, this Court proceeded to dispose of the petition. According to the petitioner, he requested the President of BCCI to conduct urgent hearing in the matter and also requested to release his match fees for the period of 2013 2014 and 20142015. The petitioner was again directed to remain present for hearing before the Disciplinary Committee on 24.12.2015. He appeared before the Disciplinary committee and tendered his reply to the show cause notice, which was handed over to him on the earlier date. The petitioner tendered his reply on 05.01.2016. The respondentBoard passed the impugned order on 18.01.2016 thereby imposing ban for a period of five years against the petitioner.