The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has filed an application in the Supreme Court over its role in the functioning of the Board of Control for Cricket in India.
The application is based on the observation or experience of its nominees for past 6 months. It says that a different approach would address the ‘oversight better and prays for a limited relief relating to the applicant CAG.
In the application, accessed by IANS, the CAG informed that they have appointed representative for BCCI Apex Council & IPL GC and till date 18 State Associations have requested nominations, for which the CAG has appointed.
But they are requesting for reconsideration as some of the appointments are against the regulations of the CAG itself and also adds to the burden of the officers. Not to forget that their role in the BCCI is different from their field of expertise.
Commenting on the plea from CAG, a BCCI official said that the issue was never auditing of accounts and it is miscreants who look at opportunities to create a ruckus.
“The associations face not only its own auditors but also the auditors of the BCCI and are effectively facing two layers of audit already and that is not the issue at all. The issue is that of some people who have emerged as motivated complainants filing false, frivolous, vexatious and misplaced complaints for publicity and who are then used by rival groups within associations as a tool to create nuisance,” the official explained to IANS.
The application from the CAG says: “The Apex Council & Governing Council are charged with governance functions, required to take management decisions which are administrative in nature. Whereas, the expertise of CAG is in financial transparency, therefore the current role played by the CAG nominee in BCCI is completely different from their field of expertise.
“The CAG nominee being a part of Apex Council or IPL GC is just one of the member, and since decisions are taken in majority the inclusion of CAG nominee as a member in Apex Council or IPL GC is not serving the objectives.
“The ‘Regulation on Audit and Accounts’ issued by CAG envisage a need to demarcate the roles of Management and Audit. It clearly lays down that Auditors cannot ordinarily be part of Management. Therefore CAG nominee being a part of the Apex Council or IPL GC is not in conformity with Regulation issued by CAG,” it said.
Throwing light on the additional burden in the nature of work, the application says: “Over 120 complaints received alleging violations of BCCI or State Associations, complaints by several individuals often run into dozen of pages. Generally these complaints are in nature of conflicts and may or may not flag specific issues of commission and omission. Overloading the officer who is a nominee in BCCI/State Association, districts from his core function in CAG office.
“CAG has been precluded from carrying out any audit, or being the auditor of last resort, or even advising any authority; if the audit of BCCI conducted by private CA/accounting firm is fair, just and reasonable,” it said.
The CAG in the application has prayed that it may be considered only for audit related matters and nomination of CAG representatives in the various committees be reconsidered. “Nomination of CAG’s representative on BCCI’s Apex Council, IPL GC, Apex Councils/Managing Committee of State Associations may be reconsidered,” it said.