In a major development for Indian cricket administration, the Central Information Commission (CIC) has ruled that the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) is not a “public authority” under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005.
The decision reverses a landmark 2018 ruling that had brought the BCCI under the RTI framework and directed it to appoint Public Information Officers.
Per an NDTV report, Information Commissioner PR Ramesh delivered the fresh order after the matter was sent back to the CIC by the Madras High Court for reconsideration in light of Supreme Court judgments.
Also Read | Mohsin Naqvi’s possible India visit during IPL final week sparks buzz
Why the CIC granted exemption
In its latest ruling, the Commission said the BCCI does not meet the conditions laid out under Section 2(h) of the RTI Act.
The order noted that the Board is registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act and was "neither established by or under the Constitution nor created by any law enacted by Parliament', per NDTV report.
The CIC also said there was "no deep or pervasive control" exercised by the government over the BCCI’s internal administration.
Another key factor was the Board's financial independence. The Commission observed that the BCCI operates as a self-sustaining organisation, generating revenue through sponsorships, media rights and ticket sales.
The ruling further clarified that tax exemptions and other statutory concessions available under law cannot be treated as "substantial financing" by the government under the RTI Act.
Commission comments on BCCI’s economic influence
In additional observations made in the order, the Commission referred to the BCCI as the "financial epicentre of global cricket" because of the scale of the Indian cricket market and the success of the Indian Premier League.
The order warned against assuming that increased government oversight automatically ensures fairness.
"To superimpose a model of oversight premised solely on governmental control may fail to account for these realities and could risk unintended consequences, including inefficiencies or disruptions in a finely balanced economic structure".
Also Read | Jasprit Bumrah likely to play only one format against Afghanistan amid workload concerns
Long-running dispute reaches conclusion
The case began after an RTI application was filed with the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports. The ministry said it did not possess the requested information and could not transfer the application to the BCCI because it was considered a private body.
The CIC relied on earlier Supreme Court rulings, including the Zee Telefilms and Thalappalam Service Cooperative Bank cases, while reaffirming the BCCI's status as an autonomous private organisation.
