ISLAMABAD - The Islamabad High Court (IHC) Thursday reserved its verdict in the matter related to supersession of interim management committee over Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB)’s governing board. Justice Noor-ul-Haq N Qureshi reserved the judgment after hearing the arguments of all parties in a matter where four petitioners had challenged the same through different writ petitions. Four petitioners include Maj (r) Ahmad Ndeem Sadal, Commodore (r) Arshad Hussain, Ahmad Nawaz and Qaiser Mirdad who had challenged validity of SRO/notification dated February 10, 2014 by virtue of which the PCB's governing board was superseded by the Interim Management Committee (IMC). At first, the court took up 25 writ petitions where some PCB employees had challenged their termination of service by the board management but Afnan Karim Kundi advocate, counsel for a petitioner Syed Tanvir Naqvi adopted before the court that the constitution of the IMC was against the law. Then, the court allowed both the petitioners and respondent PCB and Ministry of Inter Provincial Coordination (IPC) to argue at length in this matter. Dr Babar Awan Advocate, the counsel for an IMC member Shakil A Sheikh, said that the honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan has directed the high court to decide these matters within 10 days. He argued that there were two issues related to these matters. One is about the SRO/notification and the other regarding termination of service of PCB employees. Babar requested that the court should take up the employees matter first and sought adjournment in this matter from the court. Then, the court adjourned the hearing for two and half hours. Later, it resumed the hearing and counsel for PCB Tafazzal Haider Rizvi argued before the court that termination of 38 PCB employees was in accordance with the law as the board’s terms of service were non-statutory. He said that these petitioner attacked February 10, 2014 SRO/notification just when they were terminated while they did not challenge it when it came into the field. He said that if the petitioners wanted to challenge the SRO, they must have to file the case before the apex Supreme Court of Pakistan. The counsel for a petitioner Syed Tanvir Naqvi, Afnan Karim Kundi advocate contended before the court that some of the petitioners were aggrieved by the order of the PCB's IMC that was not a competent authority as their appointment was illegal and they were alien to the PCB. Advocate Kundi said that the PCB was functioning under the Sports Development and Control Ordinance (SDCO) 1962. Under this SDCO, there were two boards, Pakistan Sports Board (PSB) and Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB). As per this ordinance, the board has perpetual succession while it is said that the name, constitution and powers of the board would be defined by the federal government. He argued that the IMC was constituted for 120 days and for the purpose that it would hold the PCB elections and form a new board. Kundi said that the IMC did not have powers to form the PCB's constitution and this power lied with the federal government. In response to this, PCB's counsel Tafazzal Rizvi said that the IMC had not drafted the PCB's constitution and it had formed a committee comprising two retired senior judges of the apex court those were Faqeer M Khokhar and Syed Jamshed Ali Shah. “Now they have drafted the constitution and submitted it before the federal government,” he said.