DDCA President SP Bansal gets contempt of court notice

The Delhi and District Cricket Association (DDCA) president SP Bansal had sought an opinion from the legal firm of Gautam Dutta and Sanjay Dhawan regarding Justice Mudgal’s decision to appoint a panel to pick selectors. Forming a panel for selectors, they object, did not fall under Mudgal’s responsibilities.

The court panel, consisting of retired Justice Mukul Mudgal, received an objection from the DDCA directors in regard to monitoring the functioning of the cricketing body. The Delhi High Court thus issued court notices to SP Bansal and his lawyer, who had opposed the panel. According to the DDCA, Mudgal went overboard with the court’s order and thereby filed a plea to commence court proceedings against the judge.

On the other hand, it was observed by other court justices, namely Ravindra Bhatt and Deepa Sharma, that Mudgal had been granted the right to monitor the activities of the cricketing body by the court itself. The court bench specified that the retired judge had been asked to look into the administration for both domestic and international games.

SP Bansal and his lawyers advised DDCA to move a contempt of court plea, “for the deliberate and willful disobedience and disregard for the orders passed by the Hon’ble Delhi high Court.”

The bench has now asked the DDCA President’s lawyer to explain why contempt proceedings do not qualify against Justice Mudgal. Based on the legal opinion of both the lawyers, Dutta and Dhawan, the DDCA had written a letter to Mudgal on Sunday, in which the Justice was questioned his decision to form panels for supervising the cricket body’s business.

As per the legal view, Mudgal was allowed to only supervise the Test match and later the WT20 and IPL games played at the Feroz Shah Kotla. But going beyond his responsibilities, he recently formed two panels which would pick selectors, managers, coaches and other support staff for both men and woman cricket team. This, the DDCA argues, is exploitative.

The opinion of the legal firm read thus - “Justice Mudgal’s team have defiantly exceeded the scope and jurisdiction of the said mandate of the assignment thus rending the hurriedly appointed Selection Panel ignoring all principles of transparency, consensual by ignoring and suppressing the merit of opposition by the majority Directors of the Board of Directors of the DDCA, thus rendering the decision illegal and void.”