MS Shanker
In yet another controversial twist, the Hyderabad Cricket Association (HCA) today witnessed what many are calling a farcical continuation of its so-called “adjourned” Annual General Meeting (AGM).
The meeting, which lasted under six minutes, has raised serious questions about its legality, transparency, and intent. Legal experts and HCA insiders point out that the AGM held on June 29 had, in fact, been concluded — not adjourned — making today’s meeting both procedurally and constitutionally dubious.
Sources say the hastily convened meeting failed to follow even basic procedural norms. No agenda was circulated in advance to the 130-odd affiliated clubs. Attendees also confirm there was no formal proposal or seconding of names — a mandatory constitutional requirement — when Daljit Singh abruptly announced the appointments of K.C. Banu as Chairman of the Ethics Committee and Suresh Kumar as the HCA Ombudsman.
Interestingly, a Club Secretary claims that while the circulated agenda carried no names, the Ombudsman’s name was proposed by former Test cricketer Shivlal Yadav amidst protests from a few stating that he should be from Telangana and, apparently, seconded by Dr. Anil Kumar—or so the Secretary guesses. His uncertainty only reinforces the perception that the so-called “meeting” was conducted in undue haste, so much so that several attendees were still at the breakfast counter when these decisions were rushed through.The meeting was declared over in minutes — reportedly before breakfast even concluded — leaving many attendees stunned. “If this is not a farce, what is?” remarked a veteran club secretary who declined to be named.
The meeting was declared over in minutes — reportedly before breakfast even concluded — leaving many attendees stunned. “If this is not a farce, what is?” remarked a veteran club secretary who declined to be named.
Bypassing the Constitution, Ignoring Transparency
As per the HCA’s bylaws, any appointment or significant resolution passed in an AGM must follow due process: circulation of a pre-approved agenda, signed attendance in the official register, formal opening and closing remarks, and — where applicable — a transparent voting procedure. None of these steps appears to have been followed.
Serious doubts are also being raised over whether the minutes register was properly signed by those present, or even if the meeting was legally constituted at all. The appointments made to posts specifically designed to uphold integrity within the HCA have ironically become a symbol of the very violations they are meant to prevent.
Further adding to the confusion was an official circular sent out just hours before the meeting by the newly elevated President, stating that he had withdrawn invitations extended earlier to 57 suspended club secretaries, citing recommendations from the Justice L. Nageswara Rao Committee report. However, critics see this selective invocation of the report as both opportunistic and ironic, since its broader recommendations remain conveniently ignored.
The timing of these appointments is also questionable, given that the league season is already underway and selection committees for various age groups are yet to be finalized.
Crisis of Credibility Deepens
With glaring legal and procedural lapses, critics argue that today’s events further damage the HCA’s credibility. “You cannot bulldoze decisions under the guise of urgency. Rule of law and procedural discipline are non-negotiable,” said a former HCA administrator.
Once again, the HCA finds itself at a crossroads. Legal challenges seem inevitable. And with cricket activities already in progress, uncertainty prevails over whether the previously appointed selectors will continue or whether the AGM must be reconvened to make those decisions formally.
Either way, today’s developments are yet another blow to the principles of accountability, governance, and transparency — values long eroded within the HCA. The risk now is not just ridicule or irrelevance, but potentially a fresh round of litigation.
