Ramesh Ranganathan, J.

1. We had, by our order in W.P. (PIL) M.P. No. 30 of 2017 in W.P. (PIL) No. 16 of 2017 dated 06.02.2017, directed the Committee of Administrators of the BCCI to depute its representative to monitor the India-Bangladesh test match conducted at Hyderabad from 09th February, 2017. We had also directed the BCCI to depute a financial advisor to assist the BCCI observer, and to ensure proper maintenance of the records. The Financial Advisor was directed to submit a report to this Court by the next date of hearing. Accordingly Prof. Ratnakar Shetty, BCCI Observer, submitted his report dated 24.02.2017 enclosing thereto the un-audited income and expenditure statements of the India- Bangladesh test match.

2. In our order dated 28.02.2017, we had observed that the contents of the report of the BCCI observer dated 24.02.2017 were disconcerting, and reflected poorly on those at the helm of affairs of the HCA. A copy of the report of the BCCI observer (other than the provisional un-audited report on the income and expenditure) was directed to be made available to all the parties to enable them to submit their objections thereto. We had also directed the BCCI to submit a report to this Court by 07.03.2017 on the role of State Associations, such as the HCA, in conducting IPL matches i.e. whether they were given any share in the revenue generated from the sale of tickets, advertisements, sale of food items etc, whether any steps had been taken by the Committee of Administrators of the BCCI to ensure transparency in awarding of contracts by the HCA, more particularly those matters referred to in the initial three pages of the report dated 24.02.2017 and whether the BCCI had issued any instructions regarding the manner in which these IPL matches should be conducted by the HCA. A report has been submitted by the Chief Executive Officer of the BCCI which details the obligation of the State Associations, the franchisees and the BCCI.

3. When the matter was listed before us on 07.03.2017, the Learned Senior Counsel and the Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents 1 and 4 sought further time to file counter-affidavits. Sri K. Priyadarshan Reddy, Learned Counsel for the BCCI, however, submitted that there was an urgent need to make interim arrangements, as a tripartite agreement was required to be entered into between the BCCI, the franchisee, and the Committee representing the State Associations; as two rival groups had claimed to represent the Executive Committee of the HCA, any delay in examining this issue would put the IPL matches in jeopardy; and the BCCI requests that an Observer be appointed by this Court to oversee the IPL matches conducted at Hyderabad. Learned Counsel for the BCCI undertook to file an application in this regard by 10.03.2017. The present application was filed by the BCCI, on 09.03.2017, seeking appointment of an Observer/Administrator.

4. This application is filed by the Board of Control for Cricket in India ("BCCI" for short) (respondent No. 2 in WP (PIL) No. 16 of 2017), requesting this Court to appoint an independent Observer/Administrator for the Hyderabad Cricket Association ("HCA" for short) to work in conjunction with the BCCI to oversee/supervise the smooth conduct of the Indian Premier League ("IPL" for short) matches at Hyderabad; maintain proper accounts for the income and expenditure of the HCA in relation to the IPL matches; supervise and ensure implementation of the recommendations of Justice Lodha (Retd) Committee by the HCA, in accordance with the orders of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 4235 and 4236 of 2014; to direct the HCA and all its office bearers to function under the overall supervision of such an independent Observer/Administrator; direct that any of their decisions shall only be taken in consultation with, and the prior approval of, such independent Observer/administrator till such time that all the IPL matches are conducted at Hyderabad for the year 201