High Court reposes faith in Justice Naveen Rao; the onus is now on the SMC to crack the whip, implement reforms and restore credibility before elections
Special Correspondent
The Telangana High Court has cleared the uncertainty over who runs the Hyderabad Cricket Association (HCA), but its October 29 order has done something far more significant: it has placed the responsibility for delivering long-pending reforms squarely on the shoulders of its Single Member Committee (SMC), headed by Justice P. Naveen Rao. The message is unmistakable. Reform must precede elections, and there can be no more excuses for allowing the rot to continue.
For Justice Naveen Rao, this is arguably a defining moment. The Court has reposed its confidence in him, provided the necessary framework and given him the authority to take the process forward. The expectations of cricket stakeholders are consequently enormous. What HCA needs now is not another round of assurances, committees that merely exchange correspondence or cosmetic corrections to satisfy judicial directions. It needs decisive action. Now or never.
Significantly, the October 29 order came exactly three years after Justice L. Nageswara Rao submitted his report to the Supreme Court on October 29, 2023, containing 20 recommendations to cleanse HCA’s administration. The blueprint was available, accepted by the General Body, but remained largely on paper. Justice Naveen Rao has now been entrusted with the task of translating that blueprint into reality.
The High Court, acting on the SMC’s report, permitted a committee under its supervision to monitor compliance with Justice Nageswara Rao’s recommendations and oversee the pre-electoral process. It also authorised the SMC to appoint a new Chief Executive Officer or extend the present CEO’s tenure for a limited transitional period.
More importantly, the outgoing elected Apex Council members, whose three-year tenure ended on October 21, 2026, have been permitted to continue as an interim in-charge arrangement under the SMC’s supervision, strictly in accordance with the Court’s April 24 directions, until membership verification is completed and elections are conducted under applicable rules.
This settles the immediate leadership question. But it also makes one thing abundantly clear: the outgoing council cannot mistake the interim arrangement for an extension of its political or administrative mandate. Every decision remains subject to the SMC’s approval. Elections will follow verification, not precede it. Those clamouring for an immediate SGM and AGM must understand that an election conducted on a questionable membership roll will only reproduce the problems that brought HCA under judicial supervision in the first place.
The real rot must be confronted
Justice Naveen Rao has his task cut out. The controversial disqualification of 57 clubs, the questions surrounding institutional clubs allegedly changing hands, and the alleged control of 25–30 clubs through benami representatives are issues that cannot be swept under the carpet. There are allegations that former office-bearers, including individuals who held positions such as President and Secretary, have exercised influence over clubs, with some institutional identities allegedly passing into private hands.
These allegations warrant an independent and transparent examination, not assumptions or selective action. Membership verification must go beyond files, signatures and office-bearer lists. Who actually owns, funds and controls a club? Are its representatives genuine office-bearers? Do the same individuals exercise influence over multiple clubs? Why do certain clubs appear to change their voting representatives whenever elections approach?
Unless these questions are answered, proxy voting and voter-hopping will simply find new names and new routes into the electoral system. Justice Nageswara Rao’s action against 57 clubs must not become a convenient chapter in the past; the underlying conflicts of interest must be addressed comprehensively.
Equally important is the need to examine complaints concerning selectors, team selections, appointments and the influence allegedly exercised by private academies and power brokers. Investigating agencies probing irregularities in HCA must be encouraged to pursue their investigations independently and bring accountability wherever wrongdoing is established. Cricket cannot be administered through informal networks and vested interests.
The damage is already visible on the field. The disappointing performances of several age-group teams have raised serious questions about selection standards and the quality of administration. The women’s team’s humiliation against Delhi, which went on to register the highest-ever total in T20 cricket history, is particularly disturbing. Such performances demand an honest assessment of the systems that identify, select and prepare players. Talent cannot flourish when selection credibility is questioned and administrative priorities are misplaced.
A wish list that cannot wait
Justice Naveen Rao has already demonstrated what focused supervision can achieve. He took charge when HCA was struggling even to conduct its leagues, restored the cricket calendar, ensured open selections and oversaw teams that went on to win major titles. He did so despite what the High Court itself described as a “non-cooperative approach and attitude” from the Apex Council. That experience should leave little doubt about the need for firm supervision.
The expectations now extend well beyond elections. HCA needs an independent compliance committee without individuals holding or aspiring to office; a transparent master register of clubs and office-bearers; a professional CEO; and time-bound implementation of all 20 recommendations.
An effective Anti-Corruption Unit and POSH Committee must become functional rather than remain names on paper. Pending complaints concerning selections, player conduct and age-related irregularities must be examined and disposed of without further delay. Selection policies across age groups, particularly women’s cricket, require transparency, properly conducted leagues and clearly defined performance criteria.
Equally disturbing are allegations reportedly made by some parents that sexual favours were sought by certain power brokers in exchange for favouring their chosen candidates in selections. Such serious allegations cannot be wished away or dismissed. Justice Naveen Rao must be prepared to hear out parents who come forward with written complaints and supporting evidence, and, wherever warranted, direct the appropriate state police investigative agencies to conduct an impartial probe. Those found involved in such malpractices must be kept away from the selection process and held accountable. There can be no compromise on ensuring that selections are based exclusively on merit, demonstrated through consistent performances, and not on influence, favouritism or any other extraneous consideration.
Members, meanwhile, must also be given a credible election roadmap and regular updates on the progress of reforms.
Above all, cricket must continue uninterrupted, for men and women alike. HCA also needs a new generation of competent, younger administrators with clean records, professional outlooks and fresh ideas, rather than a recycling of familiar power centres.
A third and perhaps final opportunity
Hyderabad cricket has already squandered opportunities. The 2023 reform blueprint failed to translate into meaningful implementation. Subsequent judicial interventions in 2025 and 2026 exposed how deeply the problems remained embedded.
The October 29 order offers HCA another opportunity, but this time the sequence is unmistakable: verify membership, implement reforms, restore institutional credibility and then conduct elections.
The Court has done its part. It has given Justice Naveen Rao the responsibility and the confidence to deliver. The question is whether the SMC will use this opportunity to confront entrenched interests, demand accountability and ensure that HCA belongs to cricket and cricketers, not to those who view clubs and votes as instruments of personal influence.
Justice Naveen Rao is known for being a no-nonsense judge. This is the moment to demonstrate that same resolve in HCA’s larger interest. The stakeholders are watching, the players deserve better and Hyderabad cricket cannot afford another false dawn.
It is now or never. Justice Naveen Rao must crack the whip. The time for reforms is now; elections can wait.
