Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Hiken Naresh Shah, a professional cricketer, challenged his suspension order dated 12th July 2015 passed by the President of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI). The suspension was based on a complaint lodged by another cricketer, Pravin Tambe, in March 2015 alleging that the petitioner indulged in corrupt practices of match-fixing. The suspension order stated that pending the final decision of the BCCI Disciplinary Committee, the petitioner was suspended with immediate effect from participating in any affairs of the Board, including any form of cricket held under the aegis of BCCI or its affiliates. The petitioner contended that the suspension order was passed without any show-cause notice or opportunity of hearing, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. The BCCI argued that the suspension was an interim measure pending inquiry and that the rules of BCCI did not require a prior hearing before suspension. The court analyzed the facts and held that the suspension order was arbitrary and unreasonable as it was passed without affording any opportunity to the petitioner to be heard. The court emphasized that the principles of natural justice are fundamental and must be observed even in disciplinary proceedings of private bodies like BCCI, especially when the action has severe consequences on the individual's career. The court set aside the suspension order but clarified that BCCI could proceed with the disciplinary inquiry after giving due notice and opportunity to the petitioner. The court also directed that the petitioner be allowed to participate in cricket activities pending the final adjudication of the disciplinary proceedings.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Principles of Natural Justice - Suspension Order - Audi Alteram Partem - Constitution of India, Article 226 - The petitioner, a cricketer, was suspended by the BCCI President pending disciplinary proceedings on allegations of match-fixing without any prior show-cause notice or opportunity of hearing. The court held that the suspension order was passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice and was arbitrary and unreasonable. The court set aside the suspension order but permitted BCCI to proceed with disciplinary proceedings after giving due opportunity to the petitioner. (Paras 1-18) B) Sports Law - BCCI Disciplinary Proceedings - Suspension Pending Inquiry - Natural Justice - The court examined the BCCI's power to suspend a player pending disciplinary proceedings and held that even if the BCCI's rules do not expressly require a hearing before suspension, the principles of natural justice must be read into such actions, especially when the suspension has serious consequences on the player's career and livelihood. (Paras 10-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the suspension order dated 12th July, 2015 passed by the President of BCCI against the petitioner cricketer without giving any show-cause notice or opportunity of hearing violates the principles of natural justice and is liable to be set aside.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition and quashed the suspension order dated 12th July 2015. The court held that the suspension order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and was arbitrary and unreasonable. However, the court permitted the BCCI to proceed with the disciplinary inquiry after giving due notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner was allowed to participate in cricket activities pending final adjudication.
Law Points
- Principles of natural justice
- audi alteram partem
- suspension without hearing
- Article 226 of the Constitution of India
- BCCI disciplinary proceedings
