NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court today sought a response from BCCI treasurer Anirudh Chaudhry, after taking note of an allegation that he had recently threatened the Board's Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Santosh Rangnekar.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud asked Chaudhry to respond to the allegations of the CFO within two weeks.
Senior advocate Puneet Bali, appearing for the BCCI treasurer, vehemently denied the allegations and said he had never threatened the CFO.
Senior lawyer Gopal Subramanium, who is assisting the bench as an amicus curiae, said an e-mail from the CFO was received by Vinod Rai, chief of the Committee of Administrators (CoA), alleging that Chaudhry threatened him on three occasions.
The apex court also asked CoA to file a chart, containing comments and suggestions on the draft constitution of BCCI and fixed the matter for hearing in the second week of January next year.
The apex court-appointed CoA had submitted the draft constitution before it on September 11 in a sealed cover.
In a separate development, the Competition today imposed a fine of Rs 52.24 crore on cash-rich cricket board for its anti-competitive practises with respect to IPL media rights.
Meanwhile, the Cricket Association of Bihar (CAB) through its secretary Aditya Varma sought to withdraw its plea that the CoA be directed to consider granting membership to the state cricket body on the ground that such a large population cannot go unrepresented.
Varma said that CAB would now approach the CoA with its plea to recognise the state cricket body so that the youth may get chance to represent the state and the nation.
The court had on August 23 summoned BCCI office-bearers C K Khanna, Amitabh Choudhary and Aniruddh Chaudhry for allegedly coming in the way of the preparation of the draft constitution. After they appeared on October 30, the court had exempted them from appearing before it today.
The top court had said that the draft constitution should include the suggestions of the Lodha committee in its entirety so that a holistic document can be placed before it for a final decision.
The Justice Lodha panel had recommended a slew of structural reforms in BCCI which were approved by the apex court.
It had approved the Lodha panel's recommendations such as 'one state-one vote', 'one member-one post', and fixing an age-cap of 70 years on those occupying BCCI posts.
The Lodha panel was formed in January 2015 in the wake of the Justice Mukul Mudgal Committee report that called for reforms within the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI).
The Mudgal panel had gone into state of affairs of the BCCI, following the 2013 IPL betting and spot-fixing charges.
The court had in its July 18 last year's verdict accepted most recommendations of the Lodha committee to reform the BCCI following charges of large-scale maladministration in the cash-rich cricket body.