Published: Nov 06, 2016, 10:38 AM (IST)
Edited: Nov 06, 2016, 10:38 AM (IST)
New Delhi: The DDCA‘s Sports Committee on Saturday decided to sack former India players Atul Wassan and Nikhil Chopra from the state’s senior selection panel while removing Maninder Singh from the junior selection panel. The sports committee has included national selector Sarandeep Singh in the panel citing the general convention that national selectors are always made chairman of state selection committee as it has been the case with likes of Madan Lal, Kirti Azad, Chetan Chauhan to name a few. However they have named former leg spinner Rakesh Shukla in the panel but it could be in complete violation with the norms of the BCCI which has set an age-cap of 60 years for being eligible. Shukla is currently 68 years old. FULL CRICKET SCORECARD: India vs England, 1st Test at Rajkot
In place of Maninder Singh, the committee named former wicketkeeper-batsman Vinay Kumar in the panel. There could be far reaching legal implications of this decision as Chopra and Wassan were appointed by a panel selected by Justice Mukul Mudgal, who is the Delhi High Court appointed observer. Those in know of legal ramifications feel that this could be a clear case of contempt by Sports Committee which has been sidelined since Mudgal started overseeing DDCA matters.
A press release issued by Sports Committee convenor Vinod Tihara stated: “In the wake of the persistent complaints being received by the DDCA management regarding the alleged commercial engagements of 3 selectors namely: Maninder Singh, Atul Wassan and Nikhil Chopra.” DDCA asks for extension after missing out on U-19 online registration
Wassan, Chopra and Maninder all have media contracts which the Sports Committee claims is a case of “Conflict of Interest”. When Chopra’s comments were sought, he fumed: “This is news to me. I have been appointed by a committee that was formed by Delhi High Court appointed observer Justice Mukul Mudgal. And what conflict of interest are they talking about? These are some vested interest at work.”
The committee cited Articles 47 of its Articles of Association and Sec 5 and sec 179 of Companies Act 2013 being followed in this regard. When Tihara was asked if this decision amounted to ‘Contempt of Court’ or trying to overrule High Court appointed observers, he told PTI: “I don’t think question of contempt arises as Justice Mudgal is an observer and not an administrator. As far as Shukla’s age and appointment is concerned, we will check if this violates the norms set by BCCI.”
Asked if Delhi coach KP Bhaskar would also be removed as he was also appointed by the panel set by Mudgal, Tihara said: “No we are not going to remove Bhaskar as it would seem like having a vindictive attitude. We heard some complaints about some alleged misbehavior with the boys. After internal inquiry we found out that nothing of that sort has happened. Also he does not have any case of Conflict of Interest.”
