BCB body, AGM challenged in court

September 25, 2017

A writ petition was filed on Sunday seeking a High Court’s directive to restrain the incumbent executive members of Bangladesh Cricket Board from holding both the Annual General Meeting and the Extraordinary General Meeting scheduled on October 2. The petitioner and architect Mubasshar Hussain also prayed for a rule on the government and the National Sports Council to explain why they should not prevent the present board of directors of the BCB from holding office.
Mubasshar’s lawyer Mahbub Shafique told reporters that the writ petition is likely to be moved today before the High Court vacation bench.
Attorney general Mahbubey Alam told reporters at his office that he would contest the writ petition on behalf of the NSC and BCB.
In his petition, Mubasshar said that BCB’s present board of directors had lost validity from functioning and holding the AGA or EGM since July 26 when the Appellate Division upheld a High Court verdict that had declared illegal the amendments, brought to BCB’s constitution by NSC in 2012.
It was the second writ petition filed by Mubasshar, a former Brothers Union president and a former executive member of the BCB, against ruling party MP Nazmul Hasan-led BCB committee.
Nazmul earlier on Thursday accused Mubasshar of playing at the hands of fellow ruling party MP and a former BCB president Saber Hossain Chowdhury.
On January 27, 2013, the High Court had declared BCB’s constitution that was amended in 2012, illegal responding to a writ petition jointly filed by Mubasshar and Comilla District Sports Association’s general secretary Yousuf Jamil Babu.
The present BCB committee was elected on October 10, 2013 after the Appellate Division stayed the High Court’s verdict till disposal of an appeal filed by NSC and the BCB.
The BCB board of directors later elected Nazmul as their president on October 30, 2013.
A five-judge Appellate Division bench led by the chief justice, Md Muzammel Hossain, on July 25, 2013 had allowed holding the BCB election on condition that ‘the ensuring election of BCB is to be held as per amendment of its constitution made on November 21, 2012 by NSC subject to the result of appeals.’
Later on July 26, 2017 a three–member Appellate Division bench, headed by chief justice SK Sinha, in its verdict observed that NSC had ‘usurped the power of BCB to amend its constitution’ and ‘therefore the High Court Division was justified in making the rule absolute.’
In its verdict, the Apex court also said, ‘the BCB is at liberty to amend its constitution at any time as per provision of Article 11.1 and Article 26 of its constitution so that requirements of International Cricket Council are subject to the approval of the NSC.’

-With New Age input

Advertisement Area


Got something to say?

You must be logged in to post a comment.