<div class="img-caption-wrap "> <img alt="PIL against BCCI and IPL dismissed by Madras High Court" src="https://st2.cricketcountry.com/wp-content/uploads/cricket/image_20130526142459.jpg" title="PIL against BCCI and IPL dismissed by Madras High Court" /> <p class="imgcaptionnew" style="width:618px;"> N Srinivasan was at the centre of the storm as his son-in-law was arrested on allegations of betting © IANS</p> </div> <strong>Madurai: Jul 9, 2013</strong><br /> <br /> <a href="/tags/Madras-High-Court-Bench/post" target="_blank">Madras High Court Bench</a> in Madurai on Tuesday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a direction to the Centre to take control of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and the Indian Premier League (IPL) for alleged irregularities, saying there was no material to substantiate the charges and slammed it as a classic case of abuse of process of law.<br /> <br /> "The PIL is a classic case of abuse of process of the court and law...this kind of PIL should not be encouraged by this court," a bench comprising Justice S Rajeswaran and Justice T Mathivanan said in their hard hitting observation.<br /> <br /> It was dismissing the PIL filed by city-based advocate V Santhakumaresan, who sought a direction to the government to take over the management of BCCI and the <a href="/tags/IPL/post" target="_blank">IPL</a> in view of the alleged irregularities including <a href="https://www.cricketcountry.com/tags/IPL-2013-spot_fixing-controversy/post" target="_blank">spot-fixing in the T-20 tournament</a>.<br /> <br /> He had also sought a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the charges.<br /> <br /> Pulling up the petitioner, the court said, "Being a lawyer, the petitioner should have ascertained the facts. He has come to this court without any materials, excepting the newspaper reports to file the case."<br /> <br /> The counsel for the <a href="/tags/BCCI/post" target="_blank">BCCI</a> said that the petitioner was trying to sensationalise and seek publicity and it was against the guidelines for filing PIL in the courts.<br /> <br /> The BCCI was a society registered Under the Tamil Nadu Society Act. There was no genuine cause of action and the entire PIL was based on newspaper reports alone. There was no legally acceptable material, the counsel said.<br /> <br /> Petitioner's counsel W. Peter Ramesh Kumar contended that the Indian cricket team "should not be represented by a private registered society, which makes profit only to fill in the pockets of a few individuals."