Our Sports Reporter
They alleged on Sunday that association has failed to implement the Supreme Court’s judgment in a proper way, and said that it is surprising.
Several former cricketers and officials of different district cricket associations met in a city hotel on Sunday when they discussed different issues relating to the cricket in the State and the recent activities of the ACA.
Talking to the media on the sideline of the meeting, former cricketer Sajjad Hussain said: “Following the Supreme Court’s directive the BCCI has already framed its new constitution which is in the organization’s website. Other state cricket associations should toe the BCCI line. We’ve come to know that the Assam Cricket Association has constituted a new constitution. However, it’s unfortunate that the constitution has not been uploaded in BCCI’s website. Such an omission on the part of the ACA has kept us in dark about the content of the constitution. We’ve heard that there are some clauses that go against the apex court judgement.”
Hussain further alleged, “We’ve come to know from sources that a clause has been incorporated in the new ACA constitution allowing only governing body members completing two years as office-bearers as eligible candidates for contesting ACA elections. If it is true, it is surely against the spirit of the judgment of the Supreme Court and the game of cricket.”
Several former cricketers and cricket administrators like Sahajananda Ojha, Bimal Bharali, Naren Sabha Pandit and many others attended the meeting. An open house discussion was also held at the meeting on the formation of District Cricket Associations and Cricket Players’ Associations. Many speakers said that without the formation of these associations it is impossible to develop cricket in the State. They demanded the ACA to take immediate steps towards that end.
The meeting also expressed surprise that a few office bearers of the Assam Cricket Association are still holding some key positions in the association even though they have completed their 9 years term. They felt, it is clear cut violation of Supreme Court Judgment.