Former Delhi & District Cricket Association (DDCA) secretary Vinod Tihara has petitioned the Apex Council to remove current official Ashok Sharma, citing alleged violation of tenure rules under the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) constitution framed by the Justice Lodha Committee. Tihara’s letter referenced a complaint lodged by voter member Praveen Kumar Arora, stressing that Sharma had exceeded the permissible nine-year term in a state body. Tihara wrote that Sharma’s tenure totals 3,288 days — almost nine years. He served as an Apex Council member from December 21, 2012, to January 30, 2017, and began his second stint on November 10, 2020. According to Tihara, Sharma’s continuation beyond September 30, 2025, would breach constitutional provisions. He further urged “immediate and appropriate action” without delay, enclosing his letter for urgent review. Read also: Virat Kohli Clears Yo-Yo Test in London, Sets New Personal Best Sharma Rejects Allegations, Points to Technicalities Sharma strongly refuted the claims, accusing Tihara of “misleading everyone” by combining two separate roles. He clarified that the DDCA constitution differentiates between Directors and Office Bearers, stating he has been an office bearer for only seven months. As per the BCCI’s constitutional norms, an individual can hold office for a cumulative 18 years — nine at the state level and nine in the BCCI — but cannot serve more than six continuous years without a three-year cooling-off period. Sharma maintained that even under Lodha reforms, he remains eligible, citing age compliance at 66 years and limited tenure as an office bearer. He questioned Tihara’s interpretation by pointing to other long-serving officials. Sharma said, “If everything is counted, how come Rajeev Shukla, who has served in several committees and is now vice-president, still holds office?” Tihara, who himself faced controversies during his tenure, referenced cases like Roger Binny stepping down as BCCI president and Mahim Verma entering a cooling-off period to reinforce his argument. However, the DDCA has not yet indicated any move to act on the petition.