A Former Ranji Cricketer
A major controversy has engulfed the Hyderabad Cricket Association’s (HCA) appointment of its Senior and Junior Men’s Selection Committees for the 2026-27 season, with a former First-Class cricketer and a 14-year veteran of Hyderabad cricket formally moving the Board of Control for Cricket in India’s (BCCI) Ombudsman and Ethics Officer under Rule 41(C) of the BCCI Constitution, seeking an immediate freeze on the newly constituted panels.
The former cricketer, who has requested anonymity, approached the BCCI Ombudsman after the tenure of the HCA Ombudsman ended on July 25, 2026. He has alleged that repeated representations made to the HCA Apex Council regarding the constitution of the selection committees went unanswered, leaving him with no option but to seek intervention from the apex body.
“Though qualified and interested, I was not even called or considered for the screening process for the Men’s Selection Committees,” he stated in his petition.
The complaint paints a disturbing picture of what it describes as procedural arbitrariness, statutory violations, and unchecked conflicts of interest in the appointment of selectors. It alleges that the committees were constituted in violation of the HCA Constitution and without adhering to the principles of transparency and equal opportunity.
Questions Over Eligibility
At the heart of the petition are allegations that several members of the selection committees do not satisfy the mandatory eligibility criteria prescribed under Rule 26 of the HCA Constitution.
The petitioner has alleged violations of the mandatory five-year cooling-off period prescribed under Rule 26(2)(A)(ii)(b), which requires selectors to have retired from competitive cricket at least five years before their appointment.
According to the petition, Senior Selection Committee Chairman P. Akshath Reddy last represented Hyderabad in the Ranji Trophy on December 22, 2022, which falls short of the stipulated cooling-off period. Similar objections have been raised against Senior Selector Mehdi Hasan, who is stated to have last played competitive cricket in November 2021, and Junior Selection Committee Chairman Akash Bhandari, who is alleged to have retired only in 2024.
The petition further alleges that Bhandari continues to play professional league cricket in the United Kingdom, raising questions about his availability to undertake year-round scouting responsibilities across Telangana.
The complaint also questions the appointment of Junior Selector P. Ramesh Kumar, alleging that he has featured in only two First-Class matches against the mandatory requirement of 25 First-Class appearances. It has additionally been alleged that his cumulative tenure across various HCA committees exceeds eight years, violating the maximum five-year tenure cap prescribed under Rule 26(3).
No Public Notification?
One of the more serious allegations pertains to the manner in which the committees were constituted.
The petitioner has claimed that no public advertisements, notifications, or job descriptions were issued either on the HCA website or in newspapers before the appointments were made. If true, he argues, the process deprived several deserving former Hyderabad cricketers of an equal opportunity to apply and be considered for selection committee positions.
He maintains that transparency cannot remain merely a slogan when appointments to such crucial cricketing positions are involved.
Conflict of Interest Allegations
The petition has also invoked Rules 38 and 39 of the HCA Constitution dealing with conflict-of-interest provisions.
Under Rule 38(2), office-bearers and committee members are required to submit written conflict-of-interest disclosures within fifteen days of assuming office, failing which termination of appointment may follow.
The petitioner has alleged that mandatory disclosures have either not been made or have not been been placed in the public domain. He has further claimed that some selectors continue to simultaneously function as commentators, academy operators, club administrators and private ground vendors while exercising influence over player selections.
The complaint argues that such overlapping commercial and cricketing interests compromise the very foundation of merit-based selection and could potentially erode public confidence in the system.
Governance at Crossroads
Beyond individual appointments, the petition raises larger questions regarding governance within the HCA.
It alleges that despite formal complaints being submitted under Rule 41(C), neither the Apex Council nor the Chief Executive Officer initiated any corrective measures or provided any explanation to stakeholders.
Drawing parallels from the Ramayana, the petitioner invokes Vibhishana’s warning to Ravana that institutions abandon their path of Dharma when they choose to protect favoured individuals over principles and justice. He argues that administrative silence in the face of alleged rule violations reflects precisely such institutional complacency.
The petition also cites Chanakya Neethi, which cautions against governance structures compromised by conflicts of interest and personal gain. According to Chanakya, institutions cease to function effectively when custodians become beneficiaries of the very systems they are entrusted to regulate.
Whether these allegations ultimately withstand scrutiny remains for the competent authorities to determine. However, the petition undoubtedly raises uncomfortable questions about transparency, meritocracy and institutional accountability within Hyderabad cricket.
For an association entrusted with nurturing future generations of cricketers, adherence to both the letter and spirit of its Constitution is not optional—it is indispensable. (The views expressed by the author are personal and do not reflect those of this e-paper.)
