'You Bring As Members Who Can't Even Hold A Bat?': Supreme Court Asks Maharashtra Cricket Association

The Supreme Court today, while hearing the issue of Maharashtra Cricket Association elections, observed the need for retired cricketers to be part of such Associations to ensure expert inputs.

The bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul Pancholi was hearing a challenge against the Bombay High Court, which stayed the proposed elections of the Maharashtra Cricket Association (MCA), which were scheduled to take place on January 6 till further orders.

The High Court bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad opined that it was 'necessary' for the court to intervene in the election process of the MCA, which is marred by controversy of 'nepotism' and 'favouritism.'

During the hearing of the petitions challenging the High Court's stay, the CJI noted the increase in the Association members from 2023, which was not there before. He observed, "From 1986 to 2023, you had 164 members, and from 2023 onwards, you made a bumper draw?"

Sr Advocate AM Singhvi, appearing for some petitioner,s submitted that a committee was created, headed by a retired judge, which rejected 48 members and induced new ones.

The CJI also inquired what was the per-person donation given by each member. Singhvi replied that one person, who was also a relative of the authorities, gave 2000 acres of land.

Singhvi also pointed out that the Charity Commissioner, without consulting the cabinet, has appointed an administrator for the Association.

The CJI weighed in on the need to have experienced sports persons as part of the Associations. He opined:

"This is one country where outstanding cricketers are there; those who have retired were the best in line. Anyone who would have respected, also uou (the Association), if you had opened 300 memberships, you would have provided it to all those renowned cricketers....who are you bringing? Those who do not even know the game of cricket do not even know how to handle a bat. Don't make us express our sentiments too much on what is happening..."

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for Respondent no.1 ( Kedar Jadhav), added that the original writ petition before the High Court was filed by an international cricket player(Kedar Jadhav).

The CJI also pointed out the need for an independent forum/tribunal for all sports, not just cricket.

"Look at the Indian players, now they are showing such outstanding performance, at least this much respect should be given to them, so please come and look after the affairs of this Association. Cricket is not because of him (authorities), it is because of the cricketers. The hockey association is known for whom? Because of the Hockey players"

The CJI ordered that since the matter is coming before the High Court tomorrow, " they should raise all their contentions before the High Court, it goes without saying that the High Court will consider the contentions and is requested to decide the matter expeditiously."

The bench also allowed the petitioners to withdraw the petition and move before the High Court for any modification of directions as per law.

The impugned order was a result of BJP leader and former Indian cricketer Kedar Jadhav petitioning the bench seeking urgent relief against the scheduled elections, citing the sudden addition of nearly 401 members to the voter list of the MCA. Some of the newly inducted members, according to Jadhav, were close relatives of NCP-SP MLA and Sharad Pawar's grandnephew Rohit Pawar. The close relatives included even the names of Rohit's wife, Kuntee Pawar and NCP-SP MP Supriya Sule's daughter's name. The former cricketer alleged that the new members also included people related to Rohit Pawar either politically or through business, and also several of them were active members of the NCP-SP party.

Counsel for the Petitioners : Sr Advs Dr AM Singhvi (for MCA, HDCA, Rohit Rajendra Pawar); Mr Mukul Rohatgi (for SDCA); Dr menaka guruswamy (for ADCA); advs Ms Dixita Gohil; Mr pranjal agarwal; Mr Yash S Vijay AOR; Ms Rupali Samuel

Counsel for the Respondents: SG Tushar Mehta; Sr Advs NK Kaul, Balbir Singh, Abhinav Mukherji, AOR Siddharth Garg and Advs Himanshu Chaubey and Mr Srijan Sinha

Case Details : MAHARASHTRA CRICKET ASSOCIATION vs. KEDAR MAHADEO JADHAV| SLP(C) No. 001833 - 001840 / 2026