Lalit Kalal elected president, Yash Pratap Singh secretary of the Rajasthan State Handball Association; Manish Agarwal is new senior vice president
Dr Manish Agarwal of Jaipur was nominated as the senior vice president. Elections were held unopposed for all the 21 posts. Lokesh Sharma was chosen as the treasurer.
Manish Verma, officer-in-charge, regional sports training centre, Jaipur, on behalf of Rajasthan State Sports Council, KC Mitharwal on behalf of Rajasthan State Olympic Association, and joint secretary Praveen Kumar Singh on behalf of Handball Association India were the observers.
While the election officer was Mahesh Chand Saini. Rajasthan State Olympic Association President Anil Vyas was also present on the occasion.
The newly elected 21-member executive is as follows
President: Lalit Kumar Kalal (Banswara); senior vice president: Dr Manish Agarwal (Jaipur); vice presidents (6 posts): Vishwajit Singh (Bhilwara), Shashi Kumar Gaur (Churu), Naresh Sharma (Kota), Abhimanyu Singh Rathore (Jalore), Arun Pratap Singh (Jaipur), Chandra Kant Saini (Ajmer); honorary secretary: Yash Pratap Singh (Tonk); treasurer: Lokesh Sharma (Jaipur); joint secretary (6 posts): Bhanwar Balveer Singh Rajawat (Sawai Madhopur), Devendra Kumar Bithu (Bikaner), Iqbal Singh (Sriganganagar), Lal Singh Rathore (Barmer), Mahesh Singh Gurjar (Karauli), Shivraj Shringi (Bundi); executive members (5 posts): Khemendra Singh Tanwar (Baran), Parbat Singh Bhati (Jalore), Shyopat Singh (Hanumangarh), Ravi Chauhan (Banswara), Anshul Rana (Dholpur).
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
35 minutes ago
- Indian Express
As Houses pass Sports Governance Bill, recalling BCCI opposition to RTI
Rajya Sabha cleared the National Sports Governance Bill, 2025, on Tuesday, a day after its passage in Lok Sabha. Congress general secretary in charge of communications and Rajya Sabha MP Jairam Ramesh posted on X that the proposed law would 'result in the extreme centralisation of sports administration', and that 'BCCI will get most favoured treatment, not subject to any laws of the land like the RTI'. Under the provisions of the Bill, only a sports body that receives financial assistance from the state qualifies as a 'public authority' under the Right to Information Act, 2005. This effectively excludes the BCCI because it does not receive any direct financial aid from the government. The world's richest cricket board has over the years resisted being labelled as a public authority, despite recommendations from the Supreme Court, the Law Commission of India, and the Central Information Commission (CIC) to bring it in the ambit of India's transparency law. The proposed law will provide for the recognition of national sports bodies and regulate their functioning, and will align sports governance in India with the Olympic and Paralympic Charters, and with international best practices. The aim is to bring transparency and accountability in national sports federations, and open up hosting, collaboration, and funding opportunities. Since cricket will soon be an Olympic sport, it is necessary for the government to also bring BCCI under the proposed law. Clause 15(2) of the Bill that was introduced in Lok Sabha on July 23 said that a 'recognised sports organisation shall be considered a public authority under the Right to Information Act, 2005 with respect to the exercise of its functions, duties and powers'. This broad definition would include the BCCI — and make its entire functioning, from team selection to awarding contracts, open to public scrutiny. A subsequent amendment to the draft, however, said that a recognised sports organisation 'receiving grants or any other financial assistance' from the government shall be considered a public authority only 'with respect to utilisation of such grants or any other financial assistance'. This change, making government funding the sole criterion for a sports body to be considered a public authority, effectively put the BCCI out of the ambit of the RTI Act. The BCCI has for long argued that it is a private, autonomous body and not a 'public authority'. Indeed, it is not a sports federation under the Union Sports Ministry; legally, it is an autonomous charitable society registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. It does not take direct financial aid from the government. However, the BCCI's position that its financial and organisational independence of the state places it outside the government's regulatory framework for public bodies, has been contested by several judicial and quasi-judicial bodies. In its 275th Report (2018) titled 'Legal Framework: BCCI vis-à-vis Right to Information Act, 2005', the Law Commission of India recommended that BCCI should be classified as a public authority, pointing to the significant indirect financial assistance it had received from the government over the years. The Report noted that between 1997 and 2007, the board had received tax exemptions to the tune of more than Rs 2,100 crore due to its legal status as a charitable institution. The foregoing of this revenue amounted to indirect funding for the board, the Commission argued. The report also cited examples of state governments providing land to state cricket associations at highly subsidised rates; for example, in Himachal Pradesh, the land for a stadium was reportedly leased for Re 1 per month. The Supreme Court has noted that the BCCI performs 'public functions' that are akin to those of a state body. In a 2015 judgment, the court noted that it selects the teams that represent India, uses national colours and symbols, and exercises a monopoly over the sport with the 'tacit concurrence' of the government. A committee led by Justice R M Lodha, which was appointed by the Supreme Court in 2015 to recommend reforms in cricket, described the functioning of the BCCI as a 'closed door and back-room affair', and said that the 'legislature must seriously consider bringing BCCI within the purview of the RTI Act'. In 2016, the top court referred the matter to the Law Commission, observing that since the BCCI performs public functions, there is a clear need for transparency. The Law Commission submitted its report in 2018 (mentioned above), and that same year, the Central Information Commission (CIC) passed a landmark order declaring the BCCI as a 'public authority', and directing the board to set up a mechanism to handle queries under the RTI Act. The BCCI challenged the order in the Madras High Court, which stayed its implementation, leaving the matter in legal limbo. Bringing the BCCI under the RTI Act would mean that any citizen of India could seek information covering not just financial matters, but the entire gamut of the board's operations. The public would be able to demand information on the criteria for team selection, details of contracts awarded for broadcasting and infrastructure, the process of appointment of officials and coaches, and the minutes of BCCI meetings. This would force the board to justify its decisions to the public at large, and not just to its constituent members. In its 2015 judgment, the Supreme Court had held that even though the BCCI is not a state institution, it is amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution because it performs public functions. This means High Courts can intervene in the BCCI's affairs if its actions are found to be arbitrary or against the public interest.
News18
6 days ago
- News18
BCCI To Become To Come Under New Sports Bill, RTI Scope Narrowed
When Union Sports Minister Mansukh Mandaviya introduced the bill in the Lok Sabha on July 23, 2025, it had a sweeping clause stating that 'a recognised sports organisation shall be considered a public authority under the RTI Act, 2005 with respect to the exercise of its functions, duties, and powers under this Act." However, in a revised version now being circulated among MPs, Clause 15(2) has been altered to state: 'A recognised sports organisation, receiving grants or any other financial assistance from the Central Government… or from a State Government, shall be considered a public authority under the RTI Act, 2005, with respect to utilisation of such grants or any other financial assistance." This subtle yet impactful shift means that sports bodies, including the BCCI, which operate without any financial assistance from the government, will not fall under the RTI Act—thereby maintaining their operational opacity. In spite of these relaxations, the bill mandates a minimum representation of sportspersons in the executive body of every NSF. This includes two athletes of outstanding merit, two members from the athlete committee, and at least four women—an effort to bring athlete voices into the decision-making process. Despite escaping the RTI net, the BCCI will now have to register itself as a National Sports Federation (NSF)—a first for the influential cricket body. With cricket's inclusion in the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics, this registration is now mandatory under the Olympic Charter. This paves the way for India's cricket team to participate officially in Olympic events. Key benefits for BCCI Key benefits for BCCI under the New Legislation include Longer Tenures, Greater Stability, as the proposed bill allows sports administrators to enjoy longer terms, relaxing the current Supreme Court-mandated limits of three terms and a maximum age of 70 years. This is seen as a strategic advantage for India, particularly in securing stronger representation in global bodies like the International Cricket Council (ICC), and aligns with India's long-term Olympic ambitions—including the bid for hosting the 2036 Games. It also streamlined dispute redressal as BCCI-related disputes will now fall under the jurisdiction of the National Sports Tribunal, offering a single-window mechanism for resolution. This change will cut down on litigation in multiple courts and provide a faster route to the Supreme Court for appeals. However, matters falling exclusively under the ICC or the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) will remain outside the Tribunal's ambit. The BCCI will no longer require the Supreme Court's approval for constitutional amendments—providing flexibility in operations and policy decisions. It can also restructure its Apex Council to align with ICC statutes, without the mandatory inclusion of external members. Though financially self-sufficient, BCCI's recognition as an NSF may make it eligible for certain government benefits, including logistical support for Olympic preparation.
News18
6 days ago
- News18
BCCI Gets Big Relief In New Sports Bill: RTI Scope Narrowed, Administrators' Term Limit Relaxed
Last Updated: In spite of relaxations, the bill mandates a minimum representation of sportspersons in the executive body of every NSF. In a significant move that could redefine sports governance in India, the central government has circulated key amendments to the much-anticipated National Sports Development Bill, offering a major reprieve to the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI). The amended draft notably narrows the scope of the Right to Information (RTI) Act's applicability to sports bodies. When Union Sports Minister Mansukh Mandaviya introduced the bill in the Lok Sabha on July 23, 2025, it had a sweeping clause stating that 'a recognised sports organisation shall be considered a public authority under the RTI Act, 2005 with respect to the exercise of its functions, duties, and powers under this Act." However, in a revised version now being circulated among MPs, Clause 15(2) has been altered to state: 'A recognised sports organisation, receiving grants or any other financial assistance from the Central Government… or from a State Government, shall be considered a public authority under the RTI Act, 2005, with respect to utilisation of such grants or any other financial assistance." This subtle yet impactful shift means that sports bodies, including the BCCI, which operate without any financial assistance from the government, will not fall under the RTI Act—thereby maintaining their operational opacity. In spite of these relaxations, the bill mandates a minimum representation of sportspersons in the executive body of every NSF. This includes two athletes of outstanding merit, two members from the athlete committee, and at least four women—an effort to bring athlete voices into the decision-making process. Despite escaping the RTI net, the BCCI will now have to register itself as a National Sports Federation (NSF)—a first for the influential cricket body. With cricket's inclusion in the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics, this registration is now mandatory under the Olympic Charter. This paves the way for India's cricket team to participate officially in Olympic events. Key benefits for BCCI Key benefits for BCCI under the New Legislation include Longer Tenures, Greater Stability, as the proposed bill allows sports administrators to enjoy longer terms, relaxing the current Supreme Court-mandated limits of three terms and a maximum age of 70 years. This is seen as a strategic advantage for India, particularly in securing stronger representation in global bodies like the International Cricket Council (ICC), and aligns with India's long-term Olympic ambitions—including the bid for hosting the 2036 Games. It also streamlined dispute redressal as BCCI-related disputes will now fall under the jurisdiction of the National Sports Tribunal, offering a single-window mechanism for resolution. This change will cut down on litigation in multiple courts and provide a faster route to the Supreme Court for appeals. However, matters falling exclusively under the ICC or the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) will remain outside the Tribunal's ambit. The BCCI will no longer require the Supreme Court's approval for constitutional amendments—providing flexibility in operations and policy decisions. It can also restructure its Apex Council to align with ICC statutes, without the mandatory inclusion of external members. Though financially self-sufficient, BCCI's recognition as an NSF may make it eligible for certain government benefits, including logistical support for Olympic preparation. With this legislative overhaul, the government appears to strike a balance between autonomy for elite federations like the BCCI and structural reforms aimed at transparency, athlete welfare, and Olympic readiness. However, the exemption from full RTI scrutiny may spark renewed debate over public accountability in Indian sports. The Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) is a law in India that grants citizens the right to access information held by public authorities. Enacted to promote transparency and accountability, it empowers citizens to seek information from government bodies and hold them accountable for their actions. The Act mandates public authorities to proactively disclose certain information and respond to information requests within a specific timeframe. Get breaking news, in-depth analysis, and expert perspectives on everything from politics to crime and society. Stay informed with the latest India news only on News18. Download the News18 App to stay updated! view comments Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
