Observing that ``unfortunately, The Management of cricket is in the hands of those people who do not know anything about the game'', Justice C M Nayar questioned BCCI counsel Radha Rangaswamy about why the Board gave preference to foreign networks over Doordarshan while allocating telecast rights for international cricket matches being played in India.

``The Board should think of the common people, who do not have access to dish antennas,'' the judge said.

To counsel's remark that the Board organised several benefit matches, the judge retorted: ``Can you tell us how much you spend on the benefit matches, and how much on the officials' trips abroad?''

Giving the BCCI four weeks time to file a rejoinder, the judge directed the counsel to be prepared to answer all these ques- tions at the next hearing on September 24.

The court's harsh criticism of the BCCI came while hearing a contempt petition moved by the Federal information and broadcasting ministry against Bindra, R K Singh the Indian representative of American sports network ESPN, Mark Lynch, U Parthasarathy and Alan Reynold (all employees of Trans World International) and Fred Clow, a senior Singapore-based officer of ESPN.

Responding to the submission of central government standing counsel Madan Lakur, representing the I&B ministry, that notice had not been served on some of the respondents, the judge said that he would issue bailable warrants if necessary to ensure their presence. The judge further directed that fresh notices be issued to them.

The I&B ministry has moved the contempt petition against Bindra and others for not honouring a commitment made to the court in March this year, under which Doordarshan was to be provided the terrestrial signals of the last day of the Ranji Trophy finals played in Madras, Tamil Nadu, on March 31. In return for this, Doordarshan gave a no-objection certificate to ESPN and TWI, which had been given telecast rights of the domestic tournament by the BCCI.

The terrestrial signals were provided only after four hours of play had gone by. The national network could telecast the match only from 1330 hours, though play had begun at 0930 hours, the petition pointed out.

Bindra was duty bound to comply with the high court order but obviously took no steps to do so, shirking his responsibility in this regard, alleged the petitioner. ``The others were also party to the high court order, but wilfully and intentionally disregarded it on the plea that clearance was awaited from their superior officer in Singapore,'' the petition read.

``The contemnors have created a strange situation where the compliance and implementation of orders passed by this court have to be made subject in instructions from persons in Hong Kong and Singapore,'' the petition added.