Join our WhatsApp Group
Breaking
Monday, September 14, 2026 New Delhi Edition
Bombay High Court

Bombay High Court Seeks Centre's Stand on Whether OCI Cardholders Can Play in BCCI Tournaments, Says Decision May Have "Wide Ramifications"

Twelve OCI-cardholding young cricketers challenging BCCI's Indian-passport requirement for domestic tournaments are directed by Bombay High Court to make the Central Government a party, with the Centre asked to state its position given the decision's potential "wide ramifications."

Court
Bombay High Court
Date of Decision
September 10, 2026
Bench
Division Bench (Bombay High Court)
Parties
12 OCI-Cardholding Cricketers (Petitioners) v. Board of Control for Cricket in India & Union of India (Respondents)
Relevant Acts & Sections
BCCI eligibility resolution dated December 18, 2023 (Indian-passport requirement for domestic tournaments)
Headnotes
A BCCI resolution passed on December 18, 2023 required players in its domestic tournaments to hold Indian citizenship, effectively barring Overseas Citizen of India (OCI) cardholders — including 12 petitioner cricketers — from participating, even though OCI cardholders and even foreign nationals are separately permitted to play in the Indian Premier League. The Bombay High Court directed the petitioners to implead the Central Government in their petitions and directed the Centre to file an affidavit-in-reply, noting the Bench's own clarification that the IPL is a separate commercial entity from BCCI's domestic tournament structure, and that it wished to know the Central Government's position on the underlying eligibility question before proceeding further.
Key Takeaways
  1. A private sports body's eligibility resolution can still require the Central Government's formal position before a court decides its validity, where the issue touches on citizenship-based eligibility with implications beyond a single sport.
  2. Courts can draw a sharp distinction between a domestic tournament structure and a separate commercial league (here, the IPL) run by the same governing body, even where both involve the same category of players.
  3. Directing impleadment of the Union government mid-proceeding signals a court's view that the case's stakes extend beyond the immediate private dispute between players and their sports federation.

Full Judgment Text

The Bombay High Court has directed the Central Government be made a party to a challenge by 12 Overseas Citizen of India cardholding cricketers against a BCCI resolution requiring Indian citizenship to play in its domestic tournaments.

FACTS:
A BCCI resolution passed on December 18, 2023 mandated that players in its domestic tournaments hold Indian citizenship, which had the effect of barring OCI cardholders from participating. Twelve young OCI-cardholding cricketers challenged this requirement, noting that OCI cardholders — and even foreign nationals — are separately permitted to play in the Indian Premier League, a fact they argued undercut BCCI's justification for the domestic-tournament bar.

COURT'S ANALYSIS:
The Court directed the petitioners to implead the Central Government in their petitions and ordered the Centre to file an affidavit-in-reply, indicating that the underlying question of OCI eligibility for domestic cricket could have "wide ramifications" beyond the immediate petitioners. The Bench clarified that it viewed the IPL as a separate commercial entity from BCCI's domestic tournament structure, and that it wanted to hear the Central Government's version on the citizenship question before proceeding.

HOLDING:
The Court issued notice to the Central Government and directed it to file its affidavit-in-reply, listing the matter for further hearing on October 14, 2026.

Source: LiveLaw, "Bombay High Court Seeks Centre's Stand On Whether OCI Cardholders Can Play In BCCI Tournaments, Says Decision May Have 'Wide Ramifications'," September 10, 2026.
Nyay Vidhan
Court Judgments · 2 min read
Decided: September 10, 2026 Division Bench (Bombay High Court)
WhatsApp Telegram X / Twitter LinkedIn

Daily Briefing
Stay ahead of every verdict. Court updates, landmark judgments and expert analysis — delivered before 9 AM.

Popular: POCSO, IBC, Electoral Bond, Article 370, NDPS Act, Bail Conditions, SC Contempt