MCA goes to Supreme Court against HC order on IPL shift

The Supreme Court will hear on Monday the appeal filed by the Maharashtra Cricket Association challenging the Bombay high court April 13 order directing the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCC

Update: 2016-04-22 21:42 GMT

The Supreme Court will hear on Monday the appeal filed by the Maharashtra Cricket Association challenging the Bombay high court April 13 order directing the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) to shift all IPL matches which are to be held in Mumbai and Pune from May 1 onwards citing drought conditions in the state.

A bench of Justices Dipak Misra and Shiva Kirti Singh listed the matter for hearing on Monday after senior counsel Kapil Sibal, appearing for the MCA, sought urgent hearing of the matter.

The high court by the impugned order on a public interest litigation had questioned the BCCI for conducting the IPL matches as it involved use of large quantities of water at a time when several parts of the state was reeling under unprecedented drought conditions.

The high court had passed the order even as the BCCI and its various state associations offered to pay about '5 crore to each of the affected district in the state and also assured all help in rendering ameliorative measures for the drought-affected people. According to the MCA appeal, transferring IPL matches out of Maharashtra undoubtedly symbolises sensitivity, “however, accepting the offer of the petitioner to contribute towards relief measures would be a partial practical resolution to the problem.”

The association said that in its Affidavit dated 12th April, 2016, before the high court it has clearly undertaken to use only the sewage treated water made available to it by the Royal Western India Turf Club, from its sewage treatment plant at Mahalaxmi, Mumbai, which otherwise, in any case, would have been released into the sea. The Petitioner has also undertaken to supply at its own costs, specified quantity of water to any government nominated village, as its own contribution to water deprived people of the specified region.

The Petitioner submitted that accepting the offer of contribution to the drought relief fund and/or providing water to the specified affected areas, would have resulted in rendering the exercise of entertaining the PIL meaningful by providing relief to the affected people.” It wanted that the matches should be played in the State as scheduled.

Similar News