Mumbai: The Board of Control for Cricket in India is facing renewed questions over whether it should come under the National Sports Governance Act, 2025, as a legal dispute over the administration of Indian cricket continues.
The issue has emerged during proceedings related to elections to the Odisha Cricket Association. The BCCI has argued that its existing constitution should govern the election process, maintaining that the new legislation does not currently apply to cricket because the sport has not been formally notified under the Act.
The dispute is significant because the BCCI has traditionally maintained that it is an autonomous private body and not an arm of the government.
Why Article 12 Matters
A key part of the debate concerns Article 12 of the Constitution, which defines what constitutes the “State” for the purpose of fundamental rights.
The Supreme Court’s 2005 Constitution Bench judgment in Zee Telefilms v Union of India held that the BCCI could not be treated as “State” under Article 12. The court noted that the board was not created through legislation, was not government owned and was not financially dependent on the government.
However, the BCCI’s private status does not automatically prevent Parliament from regulating it through legislation. The central question is whether the board falls within the categories covered by the National Sports Governance Act.
The BCCI plays a dominant role in Indian cricket, from selecting national teams and conducting domestic competitions to regulating the wider cricketing structure. Cricket also uses government owned stadiums and other public infrastructure, while the sport has benefited from various government permissions and concessions.
These factors have fuelled demands for greater transparency and accountability, although access to public facilities alone does not necessarily make the BCCI a constitutional “State” body.
What Happens If the Act Applies?
The National Sports Governance Act establishes rules covering areas such as recognition of sports bodies, elections, office bearer terms, ethics and athlete welfare.
The BCCI’s existing constitution was itself amended following Supreme Court intervention and the Justice R.M. Lodha Committee recommendations. Changes approved by the court in 2022 allowed administrators to serve six years at a state association followed by six years at the BCCI before a cooling off period.
If cricket is brought within the new statutory framework, potential conflicts between the Act and the BCCI constitution could become a major legal and administrative issue.
