All IPL 2016 matches scheduled in Maharashtra after April 30 must be moved out of the state, the Bombay High Court has ruled. The ruling came after a Public Interest Litigation questioned the hosting of matches in Mumbai, Pune and Nagpur due to a severe drought in Maharashtra.
The ruling affects 13 matches, including the final which was to be held in Mumbai on May 29. Pune will miss out on six matches, including the Eliminator and Qualifier 2, while no games will be held in Nagpur. The state was earlier scheduled to host 20 matches.
Last week, the court had sought an explanation from the BCCI and the three state associations on why water should be "wasted" on hosting the games when the state faced one of its worst ever droughts. The court later allowed the opening match to be held as scheduled in Mumbai on April 9, and asked the Maharashtra state government and Mumbai's civic body, the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation, to respond on plans to tackle the issue of water shortage. On Tuesday, the court orally asked the BCCI if matches could be shifted out of Pune.
In its defence, the BCCI had stated that less water was used to prepare the ground for an IPL game when compared to an international fixture. The board also stated that it intended to use treated sewage water for ground preparation in Mumbai and Pune. Mumbai Indians and Rising Pune Supergiants, the franchises based in Mumbai and Pune, had proposed to contribute INR 5 crore to the Maharashtra chief minister's drought relief fund and supply 40 lakh litres of water to drought-hit areas at their own cost.
While the BCCI is mulling its next move, IPL chairman Rajiv Shukla has admitted that moving games out of Maharashtra is a logistical problem for the board. He also pointed out that no objections of this kind were raised when Mumbai and Nagpur hosted World T20 matches last month.
"Organising the IPL is a gigantic work. It's not easy. All preparations had been done, completed," Shukla said. "Now shifting the matches will be a problem. So far, we have not got the written order, after we get that, we will study the order and work out an alternative plan. We always respect the court. We need to talk to other franchises. We will have to work it out.
Read More
The ruling affects 13 matches, including the final which was to be held in Mumbai on May 29. Pune will miss out on six matches, including the Eliminator and Qualifier 2, while no games will be held in Nagpur. The state was earlier scheduled to host 20 matches.
Last week, the court had sought an explanation from the BCCI and the three state associations on why water should be "wasted" on hosting the games when the state faced one of its worst ever droughts. The court later allowed the opening match to be held as scheduled in Mumbai on April 9, and asked the Maharashtra state government and Mumbai's civic body, the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation, to respond on plans to tackle the issue of water shortage. On Tuesday, the court orally asked the BCCI if matches could be shifted out of Pune.
In its defence, the BCCI had stated that less water was used to prepare the ground for an IPL game when compared to an international fixture. The board also stated that it intended to use treated sewage water for ground preparation in Mumbai and Pune. Mumbai Indians and Rising Pune Supergiants, the franchises based in Mumbai and Pune, had proposed to contribute INR 5 crore to the Maharashtra chief minister's drought relief fund and supply 40 lakh litres of water to drought-hit areas at their own cost.
While the BCCI is mulling its next move, IPL chairman Rajiv Shukla has admitted that moving games out of Maharashtra is a logistical problem for the board. He also pointed out that no objections of this kind were raised when Mumbai and Nagpur hosted World T20 matches last month.
"Organising the IPL is a gigantic work. It's not easy. All preparations had been done, completed," Shukla said. "Now shifting the matches will be a problem. So far, we have not got the written order, after we get that, we will study the order and work out an alternative plan. We always respect the court. We need to talk to other franchises. We will have to work it out.
Read More
No comments:
Post a Comment