How DDCA can't pay their members as per Companies Act

A few weeks back, it came to light that Virat Kohli’s mentor Rajkumar Sharma was threatening to quit from his post of state’s U-19 coach.

Sharma, who headed Delhi’s only successful team at the national level this year – the U-19 team made the semifinals while other state teams faltered, rubbished it later but the news spread like wildfire and disconcerted quite a few officials.

True or not, talks like these have been gaining ground.

And what is making such disillusionment among coaches and other staff members popular is the law under which the Delhi and District Cricket Association lies. The Section 25 of the Companies Act under which DDCA (and even Haryana, Himachal Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh bodies) are registered cannot pay their members if they use their services.

“Since cricket is a professional sport and requires a lot of skill and training, very often we have to turn to our former players who are also the members of the association. The problem occurs as we cannot pay them other than out of pocket expenses or other minimal expenses,” says DDCA president Sneh Bansal, who replaced Arun Jaitely as the head of the body. “It is futile if we import coaches as they’ll ask for a lot of money.”

The only way they can make salary payments is through a special application to the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA).

“We have filed an application and are awaiting the permission. Whatever the government says, we’ll abide by it,” says Bansal.

In fact, vice-president Chetan Chauhan is getting only 2 to 2.5 lakh per annum, for his expenses only. It is well below the standard salaries.

Just recently, the minister of state for the MCA was posed a question in a Parliament session as to whether the ministry is taking any action regarding the flouting of rules, apparently regarding the payment of salaries. The minister replied yes, admitting that action has been taken.

The top bosses in DDCA say they have already paid the fine and they paid to their members as it was the prevailing system and ‘it was being followed for over 50 years’.

“We have paid fines and now changed the system and are looking for permission,” said a senior official.