The Supreme Court has questioned why the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and state cricket associations should remain outside the ambit of the National Sports Governance (NSG) Act, 2025, as it looks for a way to bring an end to years of litigation over the administration of Indian cricket.
A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana raised the question on Tuesday while hearing multiple applications concerning the functioning of the BCCI and its state affiliates. The court sought responses from the cricket bodies on why they should not be governed by the NSG Act and its accompanying rules.
The issue comes nearly 12 years after the Supreme Court began dealing with the BCCI’s governance, eventually leading to sweeping reforms based on the recommendations of the Justice R M Lodha committee. The court approved a new BCCI constitution in August 2018, while allowing significant amendments in September 2022 concerning office-bearers’ consecutive terms and cooling-off provisions.
Despite those interventions, litigation has continued. Applications have regularly reached the Supreme Court from state associations and their members, ranging from requests for changes to association constitutions to disputes linked to factionalism and control over cricket bodies.
The court’s latest suggestion could potentially move such disputes away from its docket. If the BCCI and state associations agree to come under the NSG Act and its rules, pending cases concerning the administration and functioning of cricket bodies could be transferred to the sports tribunal established under the new framework.
The NSG Act, 2025, and rules notified by the Sports Ministry in May are aimed at creating a more structured regulatory framework for sports administration. They provide for a National Sports Board as the central authority responsible for recognising national sports bodies and monitoring their compliance with governance, financial and ethical standards.
The framework also lays down provisions relating to transparent elections and the tenure of elected office-bearers, while providing a mechanism for resolving disputes through the sports tribunal.
For the Supreme Court, bringing cricket administration under the legislation could address a practical problem that has persisted despite years of judicial intervention. The BCCI and its state associations have remained subject to continuing litigation over governance, even after the court itself oversaw major reforms.
The Tuesday order was brief and did not determine whether the BCCI will actually come under the NSG Act. The board and state associations will now have to respond to the court’s question, potentially opening a new chapter in the long-running debate over how Indian cricket should be governed.
