In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India set aside the life ban imposed on former Ranji Trophy player Santhosh Karunakaran by the Kerala Cricket Association (KCA). The Court also quashed the earlier judgments of the Kerala High Court and directed a fresh hearing of the original application filed by Karunakaran before the Ombudsman-cum-Ethics Officer of the KCA.
Background of the Case
Sanathosh Karunakaran, a former Ranji Trophy player and member of the Thiruvananthapuram District Cricket Association (TDCA), had filed an original application before the Ombudsman of the KCA in 2019. His plea sought the implementation of uniform bylaws across all district cricket associations in Kerala, as recommended by the Justice Lodha Committee and adopted by the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI).
Read also:- Supreme Court Rules: Commuting Accidents Covered Under Employment Compensation – Key Legal Insights
However, the Ombudsman rejected his application, citing Karunakaran’s failure to implead the District Cricket Associations (DCAs) despite repeated orders. Aggrieved, Karunakaran approached the Kerala High Court, which dismissed his writ petition and subsequent appeal, labeling his actions as concealment of material facts.
Following the High Court’s decision, the KCA issued a show-cause notice to Karunakaran under its bylaws and later imposed a life ban on him. The association blacklisted him from all cricket-related activities, forfeiting his rights and privileges as a registered member of the TDCA.
The Supreme Court, however, found fault with the proceedings at every stage. It noted that Karunakaran was never provided copies of critical orders directing the impleadment of DCAs, rendering the process non-transparent. The Court also highlighted technical disruptions during virtual hearings, which hampered Karunakaran’s ability to present his case effectively.
"The appellant had made out a plausible case to suggest that the proceedings before the Ombudsman were non-transparent and that the copies of the relevant records/orders were not provided to the appellant."
– Supreme Court Judgment
Read also:- Supreme Court Dismisses SLP in Y.R. Vincent Case, Allows Petitioners to Pursue Statutory Remedies
The bench, comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, emphasized that Karunakaran’s application sought uniformity in bylaws and was not adversarial litigation requiring mandatory participation from DCAs. The Court criticized the High Court for taking an overly harsh view without considering these nuances.
The Supreme Court set aside the Ombudsman’s order, the High Court’s judgments, and the KCA’s life ban. It revived Karunakaran’s original application and directed the Ombudsman to rehear the matter afresh, ensuring all parties are given a fair opportunity to present their case. The Ombudsman has been instructed to pass a reasoned order within three months.
Case Title:- Santhosh Karunakaran vs. Ombudsman cum Ethics Officer, Kerala Cricket Association & Anr.
