" 19 The contention that the Writ Petition is not maintainable against the HCA is only to be noted to be re.jected. The BCCI, like the HCA, is a.lso a society, but one which was registered under the Tamilnadu Societies Registration Act._The Supreme Court, in BCCI v. Cricket Association of Bihar(8) (2015) 3 SCC 251 : 2015(1) ALT 35. I (DN SC), observed that the BCCI was discharging duties like selection of the Indian Cricket Team, controlling the activities of players etc, which activities were akin to public duties or State functions so that, if there was any breach of a constitutional or a statutory obligation or the rights of other citizens, the aggrieved party was entitled to seek redress under the ordinary law or by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of t}].e Constitution which was much wider than Article 32; that did not mean that the violator of such rights would go scot-free; there is always ajust remedy for tJle violation of a right of a citizen; an aggrieved party can alu,ays seek a remedy under the ordinary course o[ law, or by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution which is much wider than Article 32; BCCI is amenable to the writjurisdiction of the High Colrrt under Article 226 even though it is not a'State' q,ithin the meaning of Article 12: tl e rationale lies in the"nature of cluties and functions" which the BCCI performs; BCCI has a complete sway over the game of cricket in this country; it regulates and controls the game to the exclusion of all others; it formulates rules, regulations, norms and standards covering aJl aspect of the game; it enjoys the power of choosing the members of the national team and the umpires; it exercises the power of disqualifying players which may, at times. put an end to the sporting career of a person; it spends crores o[ rupees on buildings and maintaining infrastructure like stadia, running of cricket academies and supporting State Associations; it frames pension schemes and incurs expenditure on coaches, trainers etc; it sells broadcast and telecast rights and collects admission fee at the venues where matches are played; all these activities are undertaken with the tacit concurrence of the State Government and the Government of lndia who are not only fully aware but supportive ofthe activities of the BCCI; the State has not chosen to bring any law or take any other step that would either deprive or dilute the BCCI's monopoly in the f,reld of cricket; on the contrary, the Government of India has allowed the BCCI to select the national team _
