Acting on the communication dated 27 July 2015 from Sports Ministry, Government
of India, the Aam Aadmi Party government in Delhi initiated a probe in irregularities
in the affairs of the Delhi & District Cricket Association (DDCA). A three member
committee was formed for the purpose headed by Mr. Chetan Sanghi (IAS 1989
batch). On 17, November, 2015 Sanghi Committee gave a report to the Chief Minister
of Delhi highlighting glaring irregularities in the affairs of DDCA and
recommendation setting up of a Commission of Enquiry to thoroughly probe the
Twenty two days after the Committee headed by Mr. Sanghi indicted the office
bearers of the DDCA, which includes Union Finance Minister Mr. Arun Jaitley, On
December 9, 2015 the Anti Corruption Branch controlled by Prime Minister Mr.
Narendra Modi and his government registered a case of corruption against Mr. Sanghi
in connection with some of his decisions dating several years back during the previous
Sheila Dikshit Government in Delhi.
The Aam Aadmi Party did not question the timing of the action, despite it being
suspect, because it did not want to impede the probe or shield any officer. When the
Sanghi Committee report reached the CM’s office and it began the process of setting
up a Commission of Enquiry to probe the irregularities in the affairs of the DDCA, the
CBI, again controlled by Mr. Narendra Modi and his government, promptly registered
a case of corruption against Mr. Rajendra Kumar (IAS 1989 batch), Principal
Secretary to the CM and conducted raids in connection with some of the decision he
took during Sheila Dixit’s regime.
The Aam Aadmi Party still did not question the timing of the action because it did not
want to impede the probe of shield any officer. It only exposed the fact that raid, in
fact, was carried out at the Chief Minister’s office where the probe report pertaining to
the DDCA was lying. In a surprise move, the CBI did not even go the departments
where the files related the alleged dealings and contracts were kept. The Search and
Seizure Memo issued by the CBI after the raids exposed the agency and Modi
Government as the files taken in possession by the Agency included cabinet decisions
of the Delhi Government and file movement register of Arvind Kejriwal’s office.
Finance Minister Arun Jaitley, who happens to be a prime suspect in the DDCA scam,
lied through his teath on the floor of the Rajya Sabha and it was exposed by the Aam
Today we are exposing glaring irregularities and acts of corruption in the DDCA with
Mr. Jaitley at the the helm of its affairs.
Facts of the case:
DDCA is a company, limited by guarantee, formed under Section 25 of the
Companies Act, 1956. The objectives of the Association as per its Memorandum and
Articles of Association is to encourage and promote the game of cricket in Delhi and
to organise the game in Delhi. A complaint has been received from the NCT Cricket
Association (Regd.) having its offices at G-89, PreetVihar, FF, Delhi – 110092, and
which counts among itsranks prominent retired cricketers and cricket enthusiasts. The
complaint makes a number of allegations against the DDCA as a company, against its
current directors and officers-in-charge as well as past directors and officers-incharge. The complaint also includes many previous complaints made by Shri Kirti
Azad, former cricketer and a sitting Member of Parliament, regarding the same issues
which seem to have been consistently ignored by the DDCA.
The DDCA and its office-bearers, including Directors, have been accused of
defrauding its members, the Board for Control of Cricket in India, cricket players and
spectators as well as governmental authorities. The allegations range from making of
payments to fabricating accounts, malfeasance, conspiracy to commit forgery
regarding false age certificates (which has resulted in registration of FIR No.
538/2014 PS I.P. Estate, New Delhi), tax evasion, flagrant violation of corporate laws
and norms of corporate governance and commission of serious offences under the
Indian Penal Code including Sections 406, 420, 465 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code.
It is debatable whether the office-bearers of the DDCA can be considered public
servants as there are conflicting decisions of the Kerala High Court on the point.
However, if the officials of the DDCA are regarded as public servants, then they will
also be liable under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.In light of the
decision dated Kerala High Court (decision dated 26 October, 2010 in Crl. M.C. No.
2726 of 2009 in case titled K. BalajiIyengarv. State of Kerala) and considering the
role played by the DDCA and the amounts of public money being handled by its
officials, they should be considered to be public servants.It is pertinent to mention
here that the CBI has already initiated a Preliminary Enquiry being CBI PE No.
understandingthat the Prevention of Corruption Act is applicable to the DDCA.
The separate offences are being discussed as under:
1. Criminal Breach of Trust and Cheating by the DDCA and its office-bearers
in making payments regarding the reconstruction of Feroze shah Kotla
The reconstruction of the FerozshahKotla stadium was carried out from 2002-2007.
The initial budget was Rs. 24 crore but it eventually ended up costing Rs. 114crores as
per the reply furnished dated December 1, 2012 by DDCA to the Serious Frauds
Investigation Office. It has been alleged that the construction is unauthorised without
requisite permissions from the Municipal Corporation of Delhi and the Delhi Urban
Arts Commission and the reconstructed stadium still lacks a completion certificate.
The stadium is, as such, in the same position as the TNCA stadium at Chennai where
demolition of unauthorised stands was ordered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. There
are no approvals of building plans on record.
There is no record of tenders being issued for most of the contracts that were awarded
by the DDCA for the construction of the stadium. Reply to Inspection Notes No. 14
and 13 of the SFIO dated December 1, 2012 lists all the companies contractors to
which payments were made. This same document also admits that the scope of work
was expanded much beyond the original tender and the same seems to have been done
without any further tender or even any formal authorisation from the DDCA. This
document also reveals that the total amounts paid for construction and allied civil
works as on March 31, 2010 was Rs. 114,46,00,903 (Rupees One Hundred and
Fourteen Crore Forty Six Lakh Nine Hundred and Three Only). Engineering Projects
India Limited (EPIL) which was awarded the original tender for Rs. 24.26 crores was
ultimately paid more than double the amount, that is, Rs. 57,20,01,943/- (Rupees Fifty
Seven Crore Twenty Lakh One Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty Three Only). Not
only was EPIL paid more than double of the original tender amount but the total cost,
as on March 31, 2010, borne by the DDCA was Rupees 114.46 crore which was
almost five times the original estimate. No tenders were issued for these ‘civil’
workswhich cost as much as the main project, that is reconstruction of the stadium.
Most of the works contracts have been given on a nomination basis. Further, an
allegation has been made by Sh. Kirti Azad, a hon’ble member of parliament and a
reputed retired cricketer,that many of the companies who have been awarded such
civil works are actually just fronts for DDCA office-bearers and that the amount spent
on the stadium has been inflated for this reason, that is, to benefit DDCA officebearers by ‘round-tripping’.This is a serious allegation and in light of the
circumstantial evidence requires criminal investigation.
Another irregularity related to stadium construction is the issue of the lack of a lease
for the FerozeshahKotla stadium. It was claimed by the DDCA to the Investigation
Team from the SFIO that the lease renewal has been put on hold because of the
insistence of Ministry of Urban Development (L&DO)on a completion certificate for
the stadium. The DDCA is operating the FerozeshahKotla Stadium under a license
from the Ministry of Urban Development paying an annual license fee of
approximately Rs. 24.64 lakh. The terms of this license allow the DDCA to utilise the
Stadiumfor a yearly license fee of Rs. 24.64 lakh is a heavy subsidy for promoting the
game of cricket. The Central Information Commission while deciding whether the
DDCA comes within the purview of the RTI Act noted that based on the submissions
of the Ministry for Urban Development, the annual lease rent for the stadium works
out tomore than Rs. 16 crores per annum which shows that a massive subsidy is being
afforded to the DDCA at the cost of the exchequer for the purpose of promotion of
sport. As such, the DDCA which is receiving massive subsidies (along with other
grants-in-aid)has carried out stadium construction violating every rule of corporate
governance and fiscal prudence. The DDCA and its office bearers have been given
many opportunities to justify the stadium construction and allied expenses due to
various complaints made by Sh. Kirti Azad but have consistently failed to do so. The
only defence available on record is the one dated September 26, 2010 through which
Shri ArunJaitley, then president of the DDCA, summarily dismissed the allegations
made by Sh. Azad. Shri Jaitley’s defence of DDCA where he defends the electoral
practices of the DDCA as well as the DDCA’s financial practices and administration
have been nullified by subsequent investigations which have all upheld the allegations
made by Shri Kirti Azad.In fact, Shri Jaitley has stated in his letter that the EPIL was
chosen for carrying out reconstruction so that payments are only made to a public
sector company. This is factually incorrect as around Rs. 57 crores worth of payment
were made to non-public sector companies and that too without any competitive
bidding and gives rise to suspicion of complicityon the part of Shri Jaitley. All these
contracts, which amounted to the excess of Rs. 57 crores over and above what was
paid to EPIL, were awarded on nomination basis without following the due procedure.
There also seems to be an effort to cover-up the malpractices and shield the guilty.
Although, by March 2010, Rs. 57 crore worth of payments had been made to private
companies without any tender, none of the officials of the DDCA took any corrective
or remedial action.
The above allegations would prima facie be a violation of Sections 406,420, 465, 468
as well as Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code if office-bearers of the DDCA are
considered to be public servants. If they are considered to be public servants, then the
provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act will also be applicable to them.
Illegal sub-leasing of the corporate boxes
DDCA has illegally constructed 10 Corporate Boxes in the stadium and have sub leased these boxes for 10 years to corporatesfora collective approximate amount ofRs
36 crore. The fact that the Corporate Boxes are illegal is apparent from the fact that
there are no building approvals or completion certificate. Further, these illegally
constructed corporate boxes have been leased withoutthe approval of the land
owners,i.e. Government of India which is a clear violation of the license conditions
and also amounts to an infringement of Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code being
criminal breach of trust on account of misuse for unjust enrichment of public land
provided to the DDCA at a heavy subsidy. It is also grounds for immediate
cancellation of license.
3. Forgery of age-verification certificates and abetment by DDCA officials
FIR No. 538/2014 PS I.P. Estate has been registered on the basis of a complaint filed
by Shri Kirti Azad. The said FIR under Sections 120,468 and 471 of the Indian Penal
Code reflects the fact that forged age-verification certificates are being prepared and
accepted in a systematic manner by the DDCA in collusion with one School name
Vidya Jain Public School, Rohini to allow over-age players to play in younger age
groups.Investigation in the FIR is pending. The FIR names specific players who have
benefited from forged date of birth and school certificates. Investigation is yet to be
completed in the instant case. It is pertinent to note here that this is a case in which not
only the office-bearers of the DDCA but the DDCA itself are under the purview of
Deliberate corruption of the electoral system in the DDCA
On record findings of two retired judges of the Delhi Higher Judicial Services show
that the election process has been the subject of much blatant corruption. The report
(at internal page 11) states that:
“We did note lack of transparency, bias and impartiality by the Sport Secretary and
the Convenor of Sports Working Committee and also in recognition of club on the
basis of inheritance. We have noted about the same in the orders with respect to the
respective club….. During the hearing, we felt that private cricket academies are being
run under the umbrella of DDCA.We noticed that from one address three clubs were
affiliated. Two clubs each were also being run under the control of the administrative
authorities of DDCA.”
The said report, on internal Page 21, goes on to note that the DDCA did not assist the
two judges who had been appointed to oversee the electoral process. This two-judge
committee, when looking at the cases of individual clubs and their representatives that
sought to vote in the elections, concluded that there were massive and continuing
illegalities in the affiliation of these clubs and thus concluded that they were not
eligible to vote.There is a categorical finding that clubs have been granted affiliation
without following any process at all.
Regarding the case of one Shri Sanjay Bhatia of Roop Nagar Cricket Club the
following has been observed, “Even though benefits are being given to Shri Sanjay
Bhatia representing Roop Nagar Cricket Club we find that benefits have been given
illegally, arbitrarily and without authority.”This, and other cases studied by the
Committee need to be investigated into in greater detail to fix culpability on persons
The inquiry into Syndicate Club (which should be the Syndicate Bank Club) held by
Sh. ChetanChauhaninto the workings of that club reveal that institutions whose
employees are not participating in competitions are still shown as members of the
DDCA. Unauthorised persons are acting for these clubs and running them as their own
private clubs. This harms the institution as well as the DDCA which gives money to
these spurious clubs who pocket it and who may also be charging money from their
players for being allowed to play. There is even a prima facie finding of payments
being made to the officials of the concerned institutions of accepting money to allow
this situation to continue. The same is a violation of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The DDCA has, as such, failed in its basic duty of administering cricket and has
violated provisions of the Companies Act regarding appointment and termination of
members which has also been one of the conclusions of the investigation done by the
Serious Frauds Investigation Office (SFIO) vide their report dated 17 October, 2012.
5. Prima facie illegal payments made and loans and advances made by DDCA
Firstly, a company formed for a charitable purpose, like the DDCA cannot make any
loans or advances to any commercial company, being contrary to the Objectives of the
Company. The Executive Committee of the DDCA itself set up a fact-finding
committee to look into allegations of large scale financial irregularities which did so,
albeit only for the financial year 2013-2014 and records till 09 December, 2014. Even
for this limited period, the Committee found that there is evidence of “huge financial
irregularity”. The Committee goes on to note that “On enquiry, it has been revealed
that many spurious and illegitimate payments have been made to certain companies in
2013-2014 and till 09.12.2014. Not only this, it is an apparent fact that Association is
overstaffed, still a lot of money has been spent on hiring superfluous workers. Apart
from this, large scale payments have been made in the form of overtime.
The Committee’s findings include the following:
a) An amount of Rs. 1.55 crore wasloaned by the DDCA to three different
companies, Vidhan InfrastructurePvt. Ltd., Shri Ram TradecomPvt. Ltd.,
MapleInfrarealityPvt.Ltd.A charitable company cannot give a loan for
commercial purposes but when confronted, Sh. S.P. Bansal, President of the
DDCAPresident stated that these were an investment to earn interest. However,
when the General Secretary of the DDCA was confronted with these
unauthorised loans, he diverged from the statement of the President and stated
that the loans givenwere actually payments made on behalf of BCCI. When
questions were raised, the money was returned after a few months without any
interest. There is no documentation regarding this transfer apart from account
entries and this prima facie seems a case of theft and/orcriminal breach of trust.
b) Substantial payments were made to 9 companies which, on investigation,
turned out to have the same registered office, same e-mail IDs as well as
common directors. Duplicate bills were issued and the reasons for payments are
falsified by ledger entries including a case where one Manu Technical &
Financial Consultant (P) Ltd. And Neofam Trading Co. were paid for work that
had already been done by one Ritu Where Engineers and Contractors in June,
c) A company named M/s KaushnikBuildcast (P) Ltd. was made payments
amounting to Rs. 1.99 crore against invoices for repair work, turnstile work,
manpower, painting work, etc. All these payments were made in advance, that
is prior to receipt of the invoice, and the Committee found that at least one of
these payments was again made for work already done, that is, for turnstile
work which had already been done by one Skidate (India) Pvt. Ltd.
d) Unauthorised and unapproved payments were made to professionals including
accountants, consultants and advocates. Payments have been made without
authorisation and often to persons and companies who have not even provided
the services claimed. These duplicate payments amount to several crores.
Corporate law consultants who have never been authorised by the Executive
Committee were made payments in a haphazard manner when there is no
evidence of them having provided any service. A company named Extra Value
Consulting Pvt. Ltd. was paid twice for the same service, that is inspection.
Extra Value Consulting Pvt. Ltd. also turned out to have one Mr. Sanjay
Bhardwaj, a partner in the statutory auditor firm of the DDCA, as one of the
prominent members. One Mr. Rajesh K. Gupta who runs Extra Value
Consulting also charged a fee in addition to the fee charged by M/s Extra Value
Consulting. Most shocking is the case of Manu Technical & Financial
Consultant (P) Ltd. which were paid for repair work by the DDCA were again
paid rs. 7,50,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakh Fifty Thousand Only)for handling
Company Law Board matters. The findings of this Committee are replete with
such instances. Such irregularities and illegalities have been found in every
kind of financial transaction, including payments of taxes.
e) Over 26 different heads there are findings by this Fact-finding Committee of
defalcation, of payments made without authorisation or for a fictitious purpose
and non-maintenance of accounts which show the complete disarray that the
DDCA functions in. This report discloses many cognizable offences but no
official action has been initiated against the concerned officers although they
were suspended. No attempt has been made to recover the amounts wrongly
paid or to ascertain if the office-bearers of the DDCA have personally benefited
from these transactions. At this stage, it would be appropriate to state that the
pattern of transactions raise grave doubts as to the culpability, including
criminal culpability of DDCA’s office-bearers.
The Fact-Finding Inquiry committee bases its finding and conclusions in no
small part on the Internal Audit Report for the Financial Year 2013-2014 by
V.K. Bajaj & Co. Chartered Accountants who were brought in, in addition to
the Statutory Auditor to audit the DDCA. The Auditor has found the accounts
of the DDCA to be in total disarray and a perusal of the same will reveal that
the accounts have been in disarray for a significant period, that is before 20132014 and as such further inquiry is required as to illegalities, including illegal
payments and defalcations made in the running of DDCA prior to this period.
6. Evasion of Entertainment Tax
As per Assessment Order No. F.18 (5)/ETO/14-15/2815/3371 dated 21 October,
2015, it has been held that although the DDCA was exempted from paying
entertainment tax until the year 2008. However, since the DDCA did not declare
the amount of Rs. 34.96 crore received for corporate boxes, tax exemption for
such payments, although received in 2003-05, has not been extended to the
DDCA. The Entertainment Tax Officers has also concluded that an amount of Rs.
5,24,40,000/- (Rupees Five Crore Twenty Four Lakh Forty Thousand Only) was
payable as tax on the amount suppressed by the DDCA. Interest on the amount
due comes up to Rs. 13,97,16,000/- (Rupees Thirteen Crore Ninety Seven Lakh
Sixteen Thousand Only)and a penalty of Rs. 5,24,40,000/- (Rupees Five Crore
Twenty Four Lakh Forty Thousand Only) for tax evasion has also been imposed.
In total, the Entertainment Tax due is Rs. 24,45,96,000/- (Rupees Twnety Four
Crore Forty Five Lakh Ninety Six Thousand Only).
An allegation has also been made that the most expensive seats are given away for
free and the price of these tickets is shown as Rs. 100/- (Rupees One Hundred
Only) when the price of tickets at less coveted stands is Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five
Thousand Only). This is an aspect which further needs investigation.
7. Compounding of offences by the Company Law Board in a questionable
The SFIO in its inspection has found massive irregularities in the DDCA and has
recommended action. However, all these offences have been compounded by the
Registrar of Companies. Further, the Company Law Board has compounded the
offences against officer-in-charge in a perfunctory manner imposing fines where
the magnitude is too low. It is also pertinent to mention here that the some of the
offences which have been compounded like those under Sections 209 and 211 of
the Companies Act, 1956 are in fact punishable by imprisonment. Further, such
compounding has been stayed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court. The bench of the
Company Law Board which allowed the compounding consisted of one Mr.U.K.
Chaudhary, Senior Advocate. Mr. U.K. Chaudhary, it has been alleged, had
appeared for the DDCA while the offending officers were in charge of the DDCA.
As such persons who were involved in referring work from the DDCA to Mr.U.K.
Chaudhary were given the benefit of compounding by Mr. U.K. Chaudhary. The
same was a clear instance of conflict of interest.
8. The Disaster Management Authority (DDMA) has pointed out serious, and
potentially fatal, fire hazards and other breaches of safety protocols.
The report of the DDMA dated 02 May, 2014 is self-explanatory. It shows
flagrant disregard of fire norms and a general disregard for safety. The fact that a
fire has recently broken out in the premises of the stadium has also not spurred the
DDCA into taking action.If immediate action is not taken to address the DDMA,
the FerozeshahKotla stadium will not be fit to hold matches. DDCA has not
clarified whether these infractions have been addressed since the date of the
In light of the facts above,the following conclusions can be drawn:
It is apparent that the DDCA and its officers-in-charge are involved in a
number of acts which are criminal offences and are otherwise unethical and
contrary to the principles of a charitable company, much less of a sporting
body.The construction of the stadium is mired in allegations and there is at
least prima facie material to conclude that the construction of the stadium
has led to huge loss to the DDCA and to the government and public in
general. Many of these facts have already been substantially brought on
record by different statutory bodies.Further investigation is required into
these facts to fix criminal culpability of the individuals in these continuing
The trend of defalcations, irregularities and illegalities in the DDCA
extends back many years and inquiry/investigation needs to be conducted
regarding the accounts and practices, financial and administrative, of the
DDCA. It is on record that the statutory auditor of the DDCA is also facing
criminal prosecution. In light of other allegations which are supported by
compelling circumstantial evidence, a thorough and in-depth criminal
investigation is required to identify the linkages between the parties which
have led to a decade long list of infractions and also to establish culpability
as well as to recover the money which has been siphoned off in one way or
As per the SFIO, most norms of corporate governance, including basics
such as preservation of records, which ensures transparency, have been
consistently not followed by the DDCA. The DDCA has defaulted on
taxes, made payments for fictitious purposes, has abetted falsification of age
by players, has violated license conditions for the heavily subsidised
stadium used by them and has broken tax and other laws.
Enquiries until now have been limited in nature and have been restricted to
certain time periods. Moreover, these inquirieshave not sought to trace out
the ultimate beneficiaries of the many instances of malfeasance and
corruption. A Commission of Inquiry may be set up to look into the affairs
of the DDCA in detail.
It is evident from the report of the Disaster Management Authority that no
completion certificate has been obtained (or can be obtained) for the
stadium.The DDCA has, in fact, endangered the lives of members of the
public by not following fire and other safety norms.Competent authorities
may be instructed to urgently look into the matters of building safety norms,
fire safety norms, etc and take expeditious action.
DDCA, beset as it is by a plethora of serious allegations and its abysmal
failure to administer the sport of cricket in Delhi, should cease operation,
pending an inquiry in the matter. In the interim the administration of cricket
should be handed over to a committee of respected cricketers and other
persons of proven integrity to be appointed by the Government of the
National Capital Territory of Delhi.
Questions are being raised on Delhi Government’s jurisdiction. Here is why these
questions have no basis:
1. The Union Government itself wrote to the Delhi Government requesting it to
probe the irregularities and corruption in the DDCA “at the earliest”.
2. In Rahul Mehra Vs Union of India, 2004, the Delhi High Court decided in this
case that office bearers of Cricket Associations, though a private bodies, will be
treated as public servants because these bodies perform public functions akin to
3. In Zee Telefilms Vs Union of India 2005, the Supreme Court upheld the view
expressed by the Delhi High Court in Rahul Mehra case and some other similar
4. In BCCI vs Union of India Justice T S Thakur, who’s Chief Justice of India,
upheld the view expressed by the above two judgements.
5. Kerala High Court in the case of Keral Cricket Association said that Office
Bearers of the Cricket Associations will be treated as public servants for the
purpose of Prevention of Corruption Act and can be tried under it.