https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281981 A body performing pervasive public functions in cricket was held amenable to judicial review under Article 226 even though it was not "State" under Article 12, because its regulatory and commercial control had a public character. Findings that two team officials engaged in betting were affirmed on probe material, and sanctions against the individuals, with possible action against franchises under the IPL framework and franchise agreement, were held permissible. The alleged cover-up by N. Srinivasan was not proved for want of sufficient material. The amendment to Regulation 6.2.4, which excluded IPL and Champions League Twenty 20 from the ban on administrators' commercial interests, was held void for creating an impermissible conflict of interest. Further inquiry into Sundar Raman's conduct was directed. en-us Thu, 22 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Nov 2022 13:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281981 A body performing pervasive public functions in cricket was held amenable to judicial review under Article 226 even though it was not "State" under Article 12, because its regulatory and commercial control had a public character. Findings that two team officials engaged in betting were affirmed on probe material, and sanctions against the individuals, with possible action against franchises under the IPL framework and franchise agreement, were held permissible. The alleged cover-up by N. Srinivasan was not proved for want of sufficient material. The amendment to Regulation 6.2.4, which excluded IPL and Champions League Twenty 20 from the ban on administrators' commercial interests, was held void for creating an impermissible conflict of interest. Further inquiry into Sundar Raman's conduct was directed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 22 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281981