Don’t give rights to any party, BCCI told

The judges had earlier sought a firm commitment from the BCCI that they will not award interim rights to any third party.

But BCCI lawyer Virendra Tulzapurkar said the matter was still pending in court and that if it dragged on, the BCCI would face an issue with the International Cricket Council (ICC). He added that it was necessary to know what arrangements were to be made before the series began.

BCCI counsel also submitted that the cricket matches have to be recorded for the benefit of the third umpire also.

In fact, in their affidavit filed in the court on Tuesday, BCCI states that it is mandatory that the series be telecast unless the ‘‘Honourable High Court rejects the non-maintainable petition.’’ In the event of it not being telecast, “there is every likelihood that not only will the entire series be cancelled with the possibility of penal measures but also that the same is likely to cause serious international repercussions.”

BCCI’s petition also makes a mention of the tender process and says, ‘‘BCCI may, in its unfettered discretion, decide to accept a tender or reject it and shall not be obligatory on its part to provide any reason therefore.’’

The whole issue came up for discussion after the ESPN-Star Sports counsel Iqbal Chagla pointed out to the court reports in a section of the media that the BCCI may award interim rights for the forthcoming Australia series to Prasar Bharti.

Even as Zee TV informed the court on Tuesday that it did not agree to its suggestion for fresh bidding, the court on Wednesday began hearing the petition filed by ESPN-Star Sports challenging the award.

Last week saw hectic activity on the telecast rights dispute which reached a peak when the court proposed that a fresh bidding process take place with the floor price at $308 million—the price at which Zee TV was awarded the conditional rights by BCCI.

Zee TV, though after its Board meeting on Monday, decided not to go for a fresh bid and chose to dispute the matter in court soon after ESPN-Star Sports raised questions on the tender process and maintained that Zee was, in fact, not eligible since it it did not possess the required two years of sports broadcasting experience.