The Committee of Administrators (CoA), appointed by the Supreme Court, has recently asked Indian captain Virat Kohli and head coach Ravi Shastri to decide on a travel schedule of WAGs. The issue has been a bone of contention for quite some time now and another matter surrounding it has come to the fore. The CoA’s decision has left both the BCCI and Chief Justice Lodha surprised.

The new BCCI constitution was formed on the basis of the set of proposals put forth by Lodha’s panel. The former CJI is surprised at how things have panned out in the last couple of years. Lodha didn’t mince any words in saying that DK Jain, the Ethics Officer, should take a stand and stop any move that is against the constitution as per the proposals of the Lodha Panel.

We don’t see any light at the end of the tunnel: RM Lodha

“What can I say? The Ethics Officer is there now to decide. What do I say? Everyone is interpreting it (the Lodha panel’s proposals) in their own way. Our recommendations are in place and based on that I was told the constitution was framed. As and when the issue arises, the Ethics Officer should take a call,” RM Lodha was quoted as saying in The Times of India (TOI).

In the meantime, a senior BCCI official was clear cut in saying that the decision to allow skipper Kohli and coach Shastri to decide on the travel plans of the WAGs is the clear case of conflict of interest. “Absolutely nothing has happened in two years. We wanted to see the report being implemented as approved by the Supreme Court but more than two years have passed and we don’t see any light at the end of the tunnel,” he added.

“The essence of conflict of interest is that when you are taking a decision of which you are yourself a beneficiary that is conflict. I think the CoA is like an unfettered entity which has moved away from any limitations it may have originally perceived on account of the Supreme Court order on the Lodha Committee report,” the official mentioned.

A member of the CoA recently mentioned that the resolution taken in the meeting wasn’t a unanimous one. Now it will be interesting to see how Ethics Officer Jain handles the whole matter.