The background:
The Mumbai High Court, in April 2016, had directed the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) to shift all the Indian Premier League matches which were scheduled to be played in Maharashtra from April 30 onwards outside the state due to the severe drought conditions. The decision had affected 13 matches, including the final that was to supposed to be held in Mumbai on May 29 but was later held in Bangalore.
And while the matches were shifted outside of the state without much fuss last year, the Mumbai Cricket Association (MCA) has found itself in a tight spot this time around.
Court questions IPL’s identity:
The Bombay High Court, on Friday (June 30), asked if India’s premier T20 tournament was a sports or a commercial activity and if the MCA,which manages the Wankhede stadium,had taken water from the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) for ground and pitch maintenance during this year’s IPL.
A bench of justices A S Oka and Vibha Kankanwadi raised the questions while hearing a petition filed by civil society ‘Loksatta Movement’ in 2016 raising concerns over water usage for ground management during the IPL when the state was hit by a severe drought.
The court asked the MCA if it had taken water from the BMC to maintain ground and pitch during the IPL matches this year.
“We would also like to know from the MCA if the IPL is considered as a sports activity or a commercial activity,” Justice Oka was quoted as saying by PTI.
Government policy makes court question IPL’s identity:
The court asked the question after it was made aware that water supply is divided into four categories according to the government policy. As per the rule, supply of drinking water is of utmost priority while supply of water for events such as ‘shahi snan’ (royal bath) has the lowest priority.
“Category C in the policy says water supply for industrial and commercial purposes. So does IPL fall under this category? Is it a commercial activity?” Justice Oka asked.
The court also directed the cricket board to file an affidavit to give a detail about the other activities which are held at the stadium and if they are sports or commercial activities. The court has posted the petition for further hearing on August 14.