IOA Chief Usha Sends Notice to Treasurer Yadav on Sports Code Breach

Add as a preferred source on Google

Indian Olympic Association President PT Usha has issued a show cause notice to the body's Treasurer Sahdev Yadav.

This follows a complaint alleging that his election breaches the National Sports Code. Usha's letter, dated September 10, requests Yadav to respond by September 24.

Complaint Details and Allegations

The complaint references a ruling from the High Court, questioning Yadav's eligibility for the Treasurer position. Usha's letter states, "The complainant cites a ruling from Hon'ble High Court, which, according to the complainant, raises concerns about your eligibility to stand for election." Copies of this letter were also sent to Sports Minister Mansukh Mandaviya and Jerome Poivey of the International Olympic Committee.

The complainant alleges that Yadav and other officials are violating the age and tenure limits set by the sports code. This code mandates stepping down after 12 consecutive years in office. Yadav, a former secretary of the Indian Weightlifting Federation, has been on its board for 15 years.

Broader Implications and Other Officials

Concerns have also been raised against other IOA members. These include Ajay Patel of the National Rifle Association, Bhupinder Singh Bajwa of the Wushu Federation of India, and Rajlakshmi Singh Deo of the Rowing Federation of India. The complainant demands their immediate removal from the IOA executive committee.

This development intensifies an ongoing conflict within the IOA. Earlier this year, Usha clashed with Executive Council members who she claimed were trying to sideline her. This included issuing termination letters to an official she had appointed.

Internal Conflicts and Termination Disputes

The Executive Council members had previously declared Raghuram Iyer's appointment as IOA CEO null and void. They also claimed to have terminated Ajay Narang from his role as executive assistant to Usha. Despite acknowledging Narang's termination letter, Usha rejected it as "absolute nullity."

The identity of the complainant remains undisclosed by the IOA. This situation adds another layer to the ongoing power struggle within the organisation.

The issue underscores internal tensions within the IOA and raises questions about adherence to governance norms. The outcome of this dispute could have significant implications for the organisation's leadership structure.