To: Anurag Thakur <email@example.com>, Rahul Johri <firstname.lastname@example.org>
The Committee is in receipt of your letter dated 24.10.2016. The Committee had, by way of its communication of 24.10.2016 sought the following:
“In this regard, the Committee requires a letter of compliance from the President BCCI duly undertaking on behalf of the BCCI to unreservedly comply with the Order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 21.10.2016.”
Your reply of 24.10.2016 addresses the order of 18.7.2016, the SGM held by the BCCI, the reforms process and the sub judice aspects of the same. This has no relevance to the question at hand. You have further referred to the stand of the office bearers of the BCCI which was also not sought from you.
You have stated that you would take “all steps in accordance with law” to implement the directions at Paragraph 20 of the Supreme Court’s order. This language is identical to the one you have employed in the past with this Committee and with the Supreme Court to cherry pick those aspects that you would seek to refer to a vote by the Member Associations. As far as this Committee is concerned, it is implicit that the orders of the Supreme Court are in accordance with law. It cannot possibly be implied by you or anybody else that the Supreme Court is passing illegal directions. There is thus absolutely no question of qualifying your undertaking by stating that your compliance with the Order would be in accordance with law.
In the absence of the unambiguous and unequivocal letter of compliance from the President duly undertaking on behalf of BCCI to unreservedly comply with the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 21.10.2016, the Committee anticipates (having regard to the consistent stance adopted by the BCCI that it has issues with regard to reforms concerning governance) that there would be impediments in carrying out the order dated 21.10.2016.