The Central Information Commission ruled that the Board of Control for Cricket in India is not a public authority and is not subject to the Right to Information Act.
This decision effectively shields the governing body of Indian cricket from mandatory public disclosure of its internal records and financial dealings. By establishing that the organization does not meet the criteria of a public authority, the commission limits the ability of citizens to use legal transparency tools to scrutinize the board.
The ruling came as a result of an appeal filed in 2018 [1] by a resident of Delhi. The applicant sought specific information that the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports said was not available in its own records [1]. Because the ministry could not provide the data, the requester sought the information directly from the BCCI through the RTI framework.
The commission in New Delhi dismissed the appeal after concluding the BCCI does not qualify as a public authority under the current legal definitions of the Act [1]. This classification means the board is not legally obligated to respond to requests for information made by the public under the transparency law [2].
The BCCI has long maintained its status as a private entity despite its role in managing the national sport and its relationship with the government. The commission's decision reinforces this distinction, creating a legal barrier between the board's administrative actions and public oversight [1].
“The Central Information Commission ruled that the BCCI is not a public authority”
This ruling cements the BCCI's legal status as a private body, ensuring that its financial operations and decision-making processes remain outside the reach of the Right to Information Act. While the board manages a public interest—national cricket—it avoids the transparency requirements imposed on government agencies, limiting the legal avenues for public accountability.
