ORDER

This proceeding is a sequel to the order and directions issued on 21 October 2016. In the previous order of this Court, the status report submitted by the three member Committee (consisting of Justice R.M. Lodha, Justice Ashok Bhan and Justice R.V. Raveendran) was taken up for consideration.

2. The Committee was tasked with overseeing the implementation of the judgment and order of this Court dated 18 July 2016. The judgment of this Court has attained finality. Review and Curative petitions have also been dismissed. By its judgment, this Court has accepted the recommendations made by the Committee in a report dated 18 December 2015 providing for reforms in the structure, organization and working of BCCI. Such an exercise is necessary in order to make the functioning of BCCI transparent, objective and accountable to the trust with which it is impressed, as a body which presides over the affairs of a sport which has millions of followers. This Court had by its judgment expressed the hope that the process of implementing its directions would be completed within a period of four months or, at best, six months. The status report submitted by the Committee recorded that the directions of this Court were ignored, actions were taken by BCCI to present a fait accompli to the Committee and the directives issued by the Committee were breached. The Committee observed that BCCI has repeatedly taken steps to undermine its authority and this Court with several statements and actions which "are grossly out of order and would even constitute contempt".

3. On 7 October 2016, while taking note of the status report submitted by the Committee, this Court recorded the following prima facie findings :

"... The sequence of events.. since 18th July, 2016 and referred to in the status report prima facie give an impression that BCCI has far from lending its fullest cooperation to the Committee adopted an obstructionist and at times a defiant attitude which the Committee has taken note of and described as an impediment undermining not only the Committee but even the dignity of this Court with several statements and actions which according to the Committee are grossly out of order and may even constitute contempt".

4. On 7 October 2016, this Court took note of the fact that despite the directions which the Committee issued on 21 August 2016 that the AGM of BCCI may transact only routine business for 2015-2016 and that any business or matter for 2016-2017 may be dealt with only after the adoption of the Memorandum of Association and rules in pursuance of the recommendations of the Committee, substantial amounts running into crores of rupees were disbursed in favour of State Associations. BCCI had informed the court that one of the reasons for its failure to adopt the proposed MoA was the reluctance of its State Associations to subscribe to it. In this background, the court was constrained to issue directions inter alia to the effect that no further amounts shall be disbursed to the State Associations except to those associations which undertake the reforms suggested by the Committee and accepted by the court.

5. Another issue which was of concern was the conduct of the President of BCCI (Mr. Anurag Thakur) who, the Committee recorded as having asked the CEO of ICC to state that the Committee appointed by this Court amounted to `governmental interference'. It may be noted here that in an interview to the electronic media, the CEO of ICC stated that the President of BCCI sought a letter from ICC that the appointment of a nominee of CAG (as directed by this Court on 18 July 2016 in terms of the recommendations of the Committee) would amount to `governmental interference' inviting the suspension of BCCI from the membership of ICC. By its order dated 7 October 2016, the President of BCCI was directed to file a personal affidavit clarifying the position.

6. There were two versions before this Court in regard to what had transpired between the President of BCCI an