BCCI acting secretary continues to stall appointment of GM, Marketing

MUMBAI: The appointment of a GM Marketing, Communications and Digital, by the Committee of Administrators (CoA) and the CEO continues to be stalled by the office-bearers of the BCCI.
A few days after BCCI CEO Rahul Johri replied to acting secretary Amitabh Choudhary’s objection on the issue saying that the post was recommended by the Lodha committee, Choudhary has re-iterated his stance that this wasn’t the case.
In an e-mail (a copy is with TOI) to Johri on Thursday, Choudhary writes: "Dear Rahul, thanks for the email relating to the selection of the GM-Marketing, Communications and Digital. Having read the same, my view is that my observations to the selection have hardly been addressed.
"So far as the commendations of the Hon’ble Justice Lodha Committee on the subject are concerned, the relevant extract thereof is quoted hereunder for ready reference: 'There would be a, maximum of six mangers to assist the CEO who would have expertise primarily in the streams of Operations, Finance, Technical, Compliance (legal), Human Resources and Media.'
"Clearly, the need for Marketing Manager in an institution like BCCI was not felt to be of primary concern even by the Hon’ble Justice Lodha Committee. Besides, even the six positions enumerated above are of Manager and not General Manager level, as is the case in the instant matter. In my view, deviation from the recommendations cannot be justified merely because the decision was taken in a COA meeting, more particularly when the appointment is not being made on the post of Manager but a General Manager.
"It is now well accepted that one of the basic reasons for the constitution of the Hon’ble Justice Lodha Committee was to bring in greater transparency in the affairs of the BCCI. From your description of the process and observations made above it can hardly be said that the process followed was transparent inter alia because the elected representatives of the organisation, which is going to pay for the proposed executive, were unaware of what transpired in the preliminary or subsequent interviews for a post that is not a part of the Justice Lodha recommendations.
"Besides, while your email had been marked to the other office bearers as advised by me on March 2, they are yet to send in their approval/observations. In the background stated above, will it still be considered unfair on my part to request that the present proposal be taken to the General Body either at the forthcoming Annual General Meeting or in a Special General Meeting convened for the purpose."