The NDMC on Monday informed the Delhi High Court that it has decided to re-evaluate the process of contract for cricket coaching at Talkatora grounds here.

The New Delhi Municipal Council's (NDMC) response came after the high court had, on last date of hearing, slammed the manner in which the contract was granted, saying it was "illogical and irrational" and needed to be re-evaluated.

The court's observation had come on a plea by a coaching centre run by an 84-year-old Dronacharya awardee, who had alleged favouritism in grant of the contract to IGMA Sports Management, instead of his Dronacharya Cricket Foundation.

Appearing before a bench of justices B D Ahmed and Ashutosh Kumar, the counsel for the NDMC said on Monday that they have decided to review the case of DCF and a new committee would be appointed to look into the process afresh.

The committee will have one sportsperson, the NDMC said, adding that the another coaching centre which has been granted the contract has no objection to its decision for a re- evaluation.

Taking note of the council's submission, the bench disposed of the petition and directed the authorities to complete the entire process in four weeks.

In his plea Gurcharan Singh, who runs DCF, had alleged that IGMA was promoted by a cricketer who has no experience in coaching.

NDMC had denied the allegation, saying a committee was set up to evaluate all the bids and marks were awarded primarily on the basis of national and international awards won by the coaches as also their trainees.

It had submitted that based on the evaluation of awards, IGMA had got seven marks and DCF four.

The court, however, had disagreed with the evaluation process, saying "we are not happy with this".

It had said that as per the records before it, none of the coaches of IGMA had won a national award as a coach, while Singh himself got the Dronacharya award, the highest in India in the field.

The bench had said if national and international awards were a criteria, then IGMA would get zero marks.

To this, IGMA had contended that its coaches had won awards and tournaments as players and the tender requirements did not specifically say the coaches have to win awards too.