Rahul Dravid cleared of conflict of interest charges

Former Indian captain Rahul de la Vid resolved the alleged conflict of interest of BCCI Ethics Officer (Ministry of Justice) DK Zain. Judge Jain ordered on Thursday after two hearings on complaints filed by Sanjeev Gupta, a member of the Madhya Pradesh Cricket Association (MPCA).

Gupta, who was appointed director of the National Cricket Academy (NCA) by the BCCI in July this year, claimed that he was guilty of a conflict of interest because he held more than one position at the time. Board Rules. Gupta's second position served by Dravid was India Cements Pvt. He claims to be involved in the Chennai Super Kings franchise at the IPL.

Judge Jain, however, said he could not write a "crash case" with Dravid under his orders and therefore "dissolved" the complaint because it was "the benefit of the grievance."

Zayn Justice, in a written response on 9 August, noted that Dravid immediately dismissed this claim. Dr. Drabid said to the Justice Judge, BCCI's "advice" and "avoid any kind of conflict of interest." Leave of absence "without pay" from India cement while stunned by the NCA. Dravid pointed out that he had been an employee of Indian Cements for 20 years but had no "no relationship, relationship or duty" with the Super Kings.

BCCI also told Judge Jain that the Super Kings franchise is operated by Chennai Super Kings Cricket Ltd., registered under the Indian Corporate Law in 2013. It has nothing to do with India Cements, an independent organization. Therefore, BCCI said Dravid could not be an employee of the Super Kings, as Gupta insisted.

"He (Dravid) argued that employment with India Cements Limited cannot be interpreted and cannot be interpreted as employment with the CSK franchise, regardless of the relationship between the two institutions, viz India Cements Limited and Chennai Super Kings Cricket Ltd." said. "He added that there was no moment of becoming" team officer of CSK ".

But Gupta did not accept it. At a hearing in Mumbai on September 26, Gupta told Judge Jain that Chenin Super Kings Cricket Ltd., along with some of the directors sitting on the boards of the two companies, is a "complete subsidiary" of Cements in India. Gupta said a "simple name change" could not resolve a conflict of interest claim by Dravid.

The ethics officer was one thing clear. Judge Jain said, “The concept of“ conflict of interest ”is not a question of what must or should be done, but a question of what is possible or possible.

Judge Jain even mentioned the rulings regarding former Dravid's former Indian teammates Sourav Ganguly and VVS Laxman. Gupta filed a complaint against three former Indian players.

Judge Jain pointed out that Ganguly and Laxman suffered "severe conflict" and violated the one-to-one post rule set forth in the BCCI Constitution.

Dravid's case allowed him to delve deeper into the rules. Judge Jain said, "It may not be enough to hold a post by an individual related to BCCI to review a case of conflict of interest." order. "But whether the retention of such post (s) causes & # 39; conflicts of interest & # 39; should be tested for anvils of reasonable understanding, real favoritism, objectivity, prejudice, benefits, etc. & # 39; Definition of conflict of interest. "

Judge Jain had to test whether Dravid's two positions had "lack of interest, lack of objectivity or prejudice" in their respective positions. "At least, I can't speculate on such a situation (no one pointed out by the objector). Ways influencing as a person engaged in the management, management or employment of a merchant or vice versa

According to Judge Jain, to avoid complications following BCCI's decision, Dravid filed an Indian cement document providing leave of absence until hired by the board of directors.