/One vote and equal say for all – Vinod Rai responds to Eduljis claims

One vote and equal say for all – Vinod Rai responds to Eduljis claims

EQUAL SAY FOR ALL

"We all have the right to give our views and we all have one vote to exercise that right. It's all equally divided," said Vinod Rai.

“We all have the right to give our views and we all have one vote to exercise that right. It’s all equally divided,” said Vinod Rai. © Agencies

Vinod Rai, the Committee of Administrators chief, has hit back at his colleague Diana Edulji’s remark that her views were not taken into consideration by the Supreme Court-appointed body as she is always in the minority.

Edulji, in an interview with The Indian Express, had said, “Maybe they (referring to CoA members) think of me as too junior a person who doesn’t know much about cricket administration, but my views are always in the minority. Now, since there are three members in the CoA, 2-1, 2-1, 2-1 is the norm of the CoA…

“I’m (upset) because this is not the way the CoA is supposed to function. People have different views and we must be able to accept certain views of the minority also. When we were 1-1, the other opinion was taken and now it’s always 2-1.”

Responding to the remarks, Rai told Cricbuzz, “We all have the right to give our views and we all have one vote to exercise that right. It’s all equally divided. In that case, it doesn’t matter how the final decision is reached, whether it is 2-1 or 3-0.”

Edulji had also said that there wasn’t uniformity in the manner in which state associations were treated by the CoA for the election process and that different yardstick were used for different states. She also pointed at the manner in which Manipur Cricket Association was disqualified from the electoral roll for the upcoming BCCI elections, as its representative, Rajkumar Imo Singh, was discharging a public duty (Congress MLA), while Delhi and District Cricket Association wasn’t pulled up for the same when more than 25 complaints were received against their representation. The main point of contention was that the association had OP Sharma, an MLA from Delhi, as the treasurer of the body.

However, Rai countered that allegation by stating that, “It’s quite clear. For Manipur, the nominee was in violation of the rules. That was not the case with DDCA’s nominee.”

Edulji had claimed that CoA had allowed three states – Bihar, Uttarakhand and Odisha – an extension to register their constitution, while the same luxury was not afforded to the likes of TNCA, HCA and MCA. Denying a biased approach towards it, Rai said, “They were given the same extension like every other association to comply with the reforms and have their constitutions registered. The last date for all associations was the same.”

He also deferred the point over the exclusion of the three government bodies – Services, Railways and Indian Universities – from the electoral roll by adding “That was a call taken by the Electoral Officer and not the CoA.”

© Cricbuzz