calender_icon.png 31 December, 2025 | 2:25 AM

HC reserves orders in TCA–HCA dispute over T20 league

31-12-2025 12:23:03 AM

Metro India News | Hyderabad 

Arguments were heard on Monday before the  High Court of Telangana in Writ Petition No. 3987 of 2025, presided over by Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka, in a case involving the Telangana Cricket Association (TCA), the Hyderabad Cricket Association (HCA), the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) and Visaka Industries.

During the hearing, submissions centred on the conduct of the “Kaka Venkata Swamy Memorial Inter-District T20 League” organised by the Hyderabad Cricket Association (HCA). Counsel appearing for the Telangana Cricket Association (TCA) contended that the tournament was not part of the BCCI-approved calendar and had been conducted without obtaining prior approval, allegedly in violation of Rule 30 of the BCCI Constitution.

TCA further submitted that the organisation of the tournament raised serious issues under various provisions of the BCCI Constitution, including approval requirements under Rule 30 and conflict-of-interest norms under Rule 38. Reference was also made to a BCCI directive dated July 11, 2021, which, according to TCA, required the HCA to consult and coordinate with TCA on matters relating to the development of cricket outside Hyderabad city. It was argued that these directions were not complied with.

The issue of locus standi of the TCA was also addressed during the proceedings. Counsel referred to earlier orders and observations of the Supreme Court of India, the Bombay High Court, and the Telangana High Court, as well as instances where TCA’s representations had been considered by the BCCI in the past.

Appearing for the TCA, Senior Counsel Raja Sripathi Rao, instructed by Advocate S. Surender Reddy, urged the Court to direct the BCCI to consider TCA’s representation dated December 18, 2021, and to take appropriate action in accordance with the BCCI Constitution, particularly under Rule 31, including any consequential steps.

After hearing submissions from all parties, the Court reserved the matter for orders.