Gujarat High Court Disqualifies Kiran More From Contesting BCA Elections

The Gujarat High Court on Monday disqualified former India cricketer Kiran More and three others from contesting the Baroda Cricket Association (BCA) elections, setting aside the election officer’s earlier decision to accept their nomination papers. The court’s ruling affects More, Amul Jikar, Anant Indulkar, and Amar Petiwale, who had filed to run for various office-bearer posts within the state cricket body. Justice Niral R Mehta allowed a plea citing a Supreme Court judgment on tenure limits and mandatory cooling-off periods for office bearers, which the respondents had exceeded.

The petitioners, Pradeepsinh Solanki and Ramchandra Prajapati, challenged the eligibility of More and the three others under the Supreme Court ruling dated September 14, 2022. The apex court had clarified that anyone completing a cumulative tenure of nine years in a state cricket association as an office bearer or councillor is disqualified. It further mandated a three-year cooling-off period after two consecutive terms and directed that bylaws and Memoranda of Association incorporate clear provisions on tenure, qualifications, and disqualifications.

The petitioners submitted their objections in writing to the election officer on January 20, requesting the rejection of the nominations on the grounds of over-tenure, but the objections were not addressed. After the final candidate list was published on February 22, the petitioners reiterated their concerns on January 27, emphasizing that the four respondents had already completed more than nine years in office. With no resolution from the election officer, the petitioners approached the Gujarat High Court seeking legal intervention.

Also Read: ICC Announces February Women’s Player of the Month Nominee: Arundhati Reddy

While hearing the case, the respondents argued that the BCCI and BCA are distinct entities, with the former being a national governing body and the latter a state association with limited jurisdiction. However, the court ruled that the tenure limits and cooling-off provisions still applied to the state association. It declared that the acceptance of the nomination forms and publication of the respondents’ names in the final list was invalid, effectively disqualifying them from the ongoing election process.

The court directed the election officer to proceed with the BCA elections in accordance with the law and its observations, while also granting the disqualified candidates two weeks to appeal the decision. Earlier, the court had provided interim protection on February 13, allowing voting to proceed on February 15 but restricting the counting and publication of results without its permission. This ensured that the election process remained legally compliant pending the final hearing.

The ruling underscores the judiciary’s oversight of cricket governance and adherence to tenure regulations within state associations. Observers note that the decision reinforces the Supreme Court’s reforms related to BCCI governance, emphasizing accountability, term limits, and procedural compliance. It also serves as a precedent for other state cricket bodies, highlighting the importance of respecting both cumulative tenure restrictions and mandatory cooling-off periods in leadership positions.

Also Read: T20 World Cup-Winning Suryakumar Yadav Opens Up on Test Dreams, ODI Struggles