{"id":104791,"date":"2026-05-24T10:24:02","date_gmt":"2026-05-24T04:54:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/?p=104791"},"modified":"2026-05-25T14:06:21","modified_gmt":"2026-05-25T08:36:21","slug":"bcci-and-rti","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/bcci-and-rti\/","title":{"rendered":"BCCI and RTI &#8211; Why the CIC Refused to Treat the Cricket Board as a Public Authority"},"content":{"rendered":"<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>BCCI and RTI Latest News<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Central Information Commission (CIC) ruled that the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) is <\/span><b>not <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">a \u201c<\/span><b>public authority<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201d under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, and therefore cannot be compelled to disclose information under the Act.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The decision revisits a long-standing debate over transparency, accountability, and the legal status of sports bodies performing public functions.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Legal Framework Behind the Dispute<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><b>RTI Act and definition of \u201cpublic authority\u201d: Section 2(h)<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> of the RTI Act defines a public authority as a body &#8211;<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Established by the Constitution, parliamentary or state laws, or government notification;<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Owned, controlled, or substantially financed by the government;<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Including NGOs substantially funded through public money.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The BCCI argued that it is &#8211;<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">A private autonomous body;<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975;<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Neither created by statute nor substantially financed by the government.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><b>Article 12 and the concept of \u201cState\u201d:<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">It includes governments and authorities under governmental control.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Courts have expanded this interpretation in some cases involving bodies performing public functions.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">However, the BCCI maintained that despite regulating cricket in India, it is not \u201cState\u201d because there is no deep and pervasive governmental control over its affairs.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Earlier Recommendations for Bringing BCCI Under RTI<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><b>Justice Lodha committee recommendations:<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The committee criticised the BCCI\u2019s opaque functioning as a \u201cclosed-door and backroom affair\u201d.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">It recommended bringing the BCCI within the RTI framework to enhance transparency and accountability.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><b>Law Commission\u2019s 275th Report (2018):<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">It also recommended that sports bodies performing public functions should come under RTI because they exercise \u201c<\/span><b>state-like powers<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201d; BCCI virtually functions as a National Sports Federation.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Despite these recommendations, Parliament did not enact any law to include the BCCI under RTI.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Earlier CIC Position and Judicial Developments<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>2018 CIC order: <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The BCCI qualified as a public authority and directed it to appoint Public Information Officers (PIOs); create an RTI compliance mechanism.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Madras High Court (HC) intervention: <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The BCCI challenged the order before the Madras HC, which remanded the matter back to the CIC for reconsideration in light of SC rulings. The recent SC order emerged from this reconsideration.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>What the Latest CIC Order Held<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><b>Registration under a statute does not make an entity public:<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The CIC<\/span> <span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">clarified that the BCCI is merely registered under a statute; it was not created by legislation or government notification.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Commission distinguished between the bodies created by law (e.g., SBI); and private entities later registered under a legal framework.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Thus, registration only grants legal recognition, not statutory status.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><b>No \u201csubstantial and pervasive\u201d government control:\u00a0<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Relying on the SC judgment in Thalappalam Service Cooperative Bank Ltd case (2013), the CIC held that RTI applies only when government control is deep, substantial, and pervasive across administration, finance, and policy.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Commission observed that the BCCI office-bearers are internally elected; no government nominees sit on its committees; government approval is unnecessary for its decisions.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Hence, ordinary regulatory supervision was held insufficient to convert it into a public authority.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><b>No substantial government financing:<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The CIC interpreted \u201csubstantial financing\u201d under Section 2(h)(d) as funding essential for an entity\u2019s survival.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">It rejected claims that tax exemptions, police deployment, and use of public stadiums amount to substantial government financing.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Commission emphasised that the BCCI generates massive independent revenues through media rights, sponsorships, broadcasting deals, and ticket sales.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>SC Judgments Shaping the Issue<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><b>Zee Telefilms Ltd. v. Union of India (2005):<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The BCCI is not \u201cState\u201d under Article 12 because there is no government shareholding; no substantial financial assistance exists; government control is not deep or pervasive.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The CIC heavily relied on this reasoning.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li aria-level=\"1\"><b>BCCI v. Cricket Association of Bihar (2016):\u00a0<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Following IPL spot-fixing controversies, the SC imposed major governance reforms through the Lodha Committee recommendations, including:<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">One-state-one-vote principle,<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Tenure limits,<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Conflict-of-interest norms.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Court also clarified that even if BCCI is not \u201cState\u201d under Article 12, it can still be subject to judicial review under <\/span><b>Article 226<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> because it performs public functions.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Thus, a body may remain outside RTI yet still be answerable before HCs for arbitrary or unfair actions.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>National Sports Governance Act, 2025<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Section 14(2)<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> of the Act provides that sports bodies will be treated as public authorities only regarding the utilisation of government grants or financial assistance.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Since the BCCI receives no such grants, the law effectively keeps it outside the RTI regime.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Implications of the CIC Decision<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Transparency concerns: <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Excluding the BCCI from RTI limits public access to information relating to the team selection processes, governance decisions, etc.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Accountability gap: <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The decision highlights a legal paradox &#8211; the BCCI performs significant public functions and regulates cricket nationally, yet it remains outside direct transparency obligations under RTI.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Distinction between public function and public authority:\u00a0<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Performing public functions does not automatically make an entity a \u201cpublic authority\u201d under RTI;<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Government ownership, financing, or pervasive control remains the determining test.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Source: <\/b><a href=\"https:\/\/www.pressreader.com\/india\/the-hindu-international-9bn2\/20260524\/281887304960224\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\"><b>TH |<\/b><\/a><b>\u00a0<\/b><a href=\"https:\/\/indianexpress.com\/article\/explained\/explained-law\/why-bcci-is-not-covered-under-the-right-to-information-act-10698809\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\"><b>IE<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The CIC held that BCCI is not a \u201cpublic authority\u201d under the RTI Act, exempting it from mandatory disclosure obligations.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":19,"featured_media":104929,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[18],"tags":[7697,60,22,59],"class_list":{"0":"post-104791","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-upsc-mains-current-affairs","8":"tag-bcci-and-rti","9":"tag-mains-articles","10":"tag-upsc-current-affairs","11":"tag-upsc-mains-current-affairs-tag","12":"no-featured-image-padding"},"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/104791","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/19"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=104791"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/104791\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":104842,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/104791\/revisions\/104842"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/104929"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=104791"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=104791"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=104791"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}