<div class="img-caption-wrap "> <img alt="Supreme Court to determine N Srinivasan’s fate in separate pleas" src="https://st2.cricketcountry.com/wp-content/uploads/cricket/image_20130822180502.jpg" title="Supreme Court to determine N Srinivasan’s fate in separate pleas" /> <p class="imgcaptionnew" style="width:618px;"> The case of legitimacy of two-member panel probing the spot-fixing controversy and N Srinivasan's (right) conflict of interest case in holding BCCI post and IPL franchisee will be heard by Supreme Court this week © IANS</p> </div> <strong>Aug 22, 2013</strong><br /> <br /> The Supreme Court (SC) is set to hear BCCI’s plea on August 29 over the legitimacy of the two-member probe in IPL 2013 spot-fixing controversy. In another plea the SC will also be hearing a case on conflict of interest against <a href="/tags/N-Srinivasan/post" target="_blank">N Srinivasan</a>.<br /> <br /> According to a report by <em>Hindustan Times</em> both the cases are set to be heard this week. In July, the Bombay High Court had called the two member pane illegal after they had cleared the owners of Rajasthan Royals and Chennai Super Kings franchisee of any involvement in betting and other wrongdoings.<br /> <br /> The spot-fixing controversy had forced N Srinivasan to step aside as <a href="/tags/BCCI/post" target="_blank">BCCI</a> president after his son-in-law <a href="https://www.cricketcountry.com/cricket-articles/Gurunath-Meiyappan-arrested-by-Mumbai-Police/26917" target="_blank">Gurunath Meiyappan was arrested</a> for his alleged involvement in betting.<br /> <br /> To further extend Srinivasan’s woes, the SC is also going to hear another plea against Srinivasan over conflict of interest case filed by former BCCI chief AC Muthiah in 2010. Muthiah had filed a petition in the Supreme Court in April 2010 challenging Srinivasan’s right to hold his BCCI post while keeping a stake in an IPL franchisee.<br /> <br /> BCCI regulation (Clause 6.2.4) until September 2008 stated that 'any administrator could not have, directly or indirectly, any commercial interest in the matches or events conducted by the board’. The clause was however amended to allow Srinivasan to continue holding both positions.<br /> <br /> Muthiah’s plea was dismissed by the Madras High Court after which he had <a href="https://www.cricketcountry.com/cricket-articles/AC-Muthiah-seeks-Supreme-Court-restraint-on-N-Srinivasan/4971">taken the matter to the apex court</a>. The two judges hearing the case had given a split verdict which meant that the case would be deferred to Chief Justice and a larger bench would be set up.<br /> <br /> It was Muthiah who had brought Srinivasan in the Indian board, a decision which he <a href="https://www.cricketcountry.com/cricket-articles/AC-Muthiah-admits-it-was-huge-mistake-to-bring-Srinivasan-in-cricket-administration/27012">expressed his regret</a> during the spot-fixing controversy.<br /> <br /> The verdict of both the cases will have crucial impact on Srinivasan's fate during the Annual General Meeting (AGM) in September this year where the discussions over election of new president will be widely discussed.