AGL 40.00 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
AIRLINK 127.04 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
BOP 6.67 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
CNERGY 4.51 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
DCL 8.55 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
DFML 41.44 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
DGKC 86.85 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
FCCL 32.28 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
FFBL 64.80 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
FFL 10.25 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
HUBC 109.57 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
HUMNL 14.68 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
KEL 5.05 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
KOSM 7.46 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
MLCF 41.38 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
NBP 60.41 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
OGDC 190.10 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
PAEL 27.83 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
PIBTL 7.83 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
PPL 150.06 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
PRL 26.88 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
PTC 16.07 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
SEARL 86.00 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
TELE 7.71 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
TOMCL 35.41 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
TPLP 8.12 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
TREET 16.41 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
TRG 53.29 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
UNITY 26.16 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
WTL 1.26 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
BR100 10,010 Increased By 126.5 (1.28%)
BR30 31,023 Increased By 422.5 (1.38%)
KSE100 94,192 Increased By 836.5 (0.9%)
KSE30 29,201 Increased By 270.2 (0.93%)

The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Friday issued notice to Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) on an application for early hearing of appeal by fast bowler Shoaib Akhtar challenging one-and-a-half-year ban on playing cricket and a fine of Rs 7 million imposed on him by an appellate tribunal for violation of discipline. The Chief Justice LHC on July 3, 2008 giving an interim relief had allowed Shoaib Akhtar to participate in national or international cricket by suspending the ban.
The bowler through his counsel Abid Hasan Manto pleaded that the appellate tribunal of the PCB was not authorised to award such penalty because the same was not provided under the relevant law. The counsel submitted that the tribunal illegally passed the impugned order by relying upon two earlier orders given by two different disciplinary committees of PCB.
He pointed out that in October 2007 a disciplinary committee had imposed a ban of 13 matches on his client and fine of Rs 4 million on the charges of hitting a fellow cricketer in South Africa. Manto said the other committee passed order of life ban, which he challenged before the PCB tribunal. He said that imposing a life ban was completely ultra vires and illegal because it was not provided in any law, rule or policy of the board. He asserted that an illegal part of that order couldn't be relied upon either by disciplinary committee that imposed five years ban and by appellate tribunal which reduced it.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2011

Comments

Comments are closed.