Should the cricket bodies reply to applications filed under RTI?
The Goa Cricket Association has been asked by the Sports Authority of Goa (SAG) to furnish the information sought by an applicant under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. An applications filed under the RTI Act seeking information about Cricket have been filed to SAG which has been transferred under section 6(3) of the RTI Act.
In an application filed by an applicant with the Sports Authority of Goa (SAG), information about the details of the total amount paid by the Goa Cricket Association to an advicate by way of legal and other fees from the year 2000 was sought. A decision in the matter is likely to be taken by the new GCA managing committee to be elected on July 22 The provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (19 of 1923), and any other law for the time being in force or in any instrument having effect by virtue of any law other than this Act. The earlier committee had refused to furnish any information under the RTI Act and a petition filed by GCA is pending before the High Court.
It has been claimed by the applicant that many regional cricket bodies the Delhi and District Cricket Association (DDCA), the Cricket Association of Bengal (CAB), the Karnataka State Cricket Association (KSCA), Hyderabad Cricket Association (HCA), and the Himachal Pradesh Cricket Association (HPCA) which are similar to GCA have and which are also affiliated to the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) have not been objecting to information being disclosed under RTI Act.
At the national level, the issue of bringing the BCCI within the ambit of the RTI Act has often been raised. In February 2011, the Supreme Court had rejected an appeal against the Kerala High Court decision which held that the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, was applicable on the officials of the Kerala Cricket Association (KCA). It implied that the officials were public servants though KCA had claimed that it was a private body. The Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, applies only to public servants.