Hyderabad High Court blocks googly on Hyderabad Cricket Association

Hyderabad: The Hyderabad High Court has refused to intervene in an amendment of the Hyderabad Cricket Association to its bylaws to postpone elections to its executive committee.

Justice A. Rajasheker Reddy was dismissing petitions by Bharath Cricket Club and Acrilyc Cricket Club seeking to declare the action of the district registrar in recording the resolution made by way of the 16th amendment on June 29, 2016, to the memorandum, rules and regulations of the HCA as unconstitutional and against its basic structure of the memorandum and rules.

The petitioners’ case was that as per Chapter V of the bylaws, the annual general meeting should be held on the last Sunday of May every year, and office-bearers of the executive committee should be elected at the end of the respective term which is two years.

The committee was elected on September 7, 2014, and its term ended on September 6, 2016. A new committee was required to be elected but the secretary at the annual general meeting held on May 29 failed to include the item with regard to conduct of election to the HCA.

Instead, the committee passed a resolution stating that it was resolved by an overwhelming majority that elections would be held on the last Sunday of May 2017 as a one-time correction by amending the memorandum, rules and regulations. The petitioners said the claim that the annual general body extended the term of the committee till May 2017 was not valid and binding.

The HCA executive committee contended that it was mandatory for a member to hold office for a period of two years to contest for the post of office-bearer; if elections were conducted on May 29, 2016 the members would fall short of the two-year period.

Justice Rajasheker Reddy found that out of the 171 members who attended the annual general meeting of the HCA, there was no grievance from any other quarter on the matter except from the two petitioners, one of who was facing disciplinary proceedings.

The judge ruled that the action of the district registrar in recording the amendment within the framework of the Cooperative Societies Act could not be faulted. While dismissing the petitions, the judge granted liberty to the petitioners to approach the district court.