As per case facts, a district cricket association faced writ petitions. One sought membership and voting rights, which the High Court granted. Another sought directions for elections, a fresh voters ... list, and compliance with prior High Court judgments (S. Nithya) regarding mandatory eminent sportspersons and constitutional amendments. The High Court allowed these prayers. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that `S. Nithya` judgments were inapplicable to cricket associations and the `BCCI` judgment should apply. The question arose whether the `S. Nithya` judgments' directives on eminent sportspersons and constitutional amendments are applicable to district cricket associations, or if the `BCCI` judgment exclusively governs cricket. Finally, the Supreme Court ruled that `S. Nithya` judgments are not applicable to cricket associations, as `BCCI` judgments govern cricket and do not mandate district associations to strictly align their constitutions. However, State Associations should initiate reforms for district associations to ensure professional, transparent, and sport-beneficial operations, focusing on good governance. Pending membership and composition issues should be resolved expeditiously for early elections.