Indian sprint icon PT Usha clashes with Indian Olympic Association members in ‘heated confrontation’

Indian Olympic Association President PT Usha faced another intense confrontation with the Executive Council on Thursday.

New Delhi: Indian Olympic Association President PT Usha engaged in another volatile face-off with the body’s Executive Council on Thursday as most members refused to budge on their decision to protest Raghuram Iyer’s appointment as the CEO. However, Usha was adamant and withstood their demands for his removal. The principal agenda of the meeting, called by Usha to ratify Iyer’s appointment on January 5, ended in a deadlock. With both sides holding to their respective stances, the controversy will probably escalate in the coming days.

“They want to re-initiate the whole process, they want to re-advertise afresh. It’s like saying we don’t want this person and let us start the process from the scratch,” a furious Usha said after the meeting.

“This process (of appointment of CEO) took two years and now they want to start all over again. This is going to have repercussions (from the IOC). It can jeopardise India’s chances of bidding for and hosting the 2036 Olympics,” she warned.

“I am not going to accept this. I have told this to the IOC (International Olympic Committee). I am not a quitter, I am not going anywhere without cleaning the IOA,” she asserted.

Interestingly, IOC Director Jerome Poivy joined the meeting online and watched the confrontation unfold.

Undeterred by Usha’s warnings, 10 members of the Executive Council (EC) who attended the meeting in person issued a statement declaring their decision to re-initiate the process for appointing a new CEO.

“The ratification of Mr lyer as the CEO was not approved. Further it was decided that process of the appointment of the CEO be re-initiated with new terms of reference,” the statement said.

They said the IOC representative termed the whole incident “an internal matter of the IOA” and stated “no specific views or interference” on the issue.

Prior to joining the IOA, Raghuram Iyer worked as an Executive Officer (EO) for IPL teams Rajasthan Royals and Lucknow Super Giants. He also was in administration for football’s Indian Super League and Ultimate Table Tennis.

“The Members further, in the presence of the IOC Director, stated that the process for the advertisement of the CEO should be initiated at the earliest where it was anticipated that the appointment can be concluded in the next two months,” the statement from the revolting EC members read..

Senior Vice President Ajay H Patel, Vice Presidents RajLaxmi Deo and Gagan Narang, Treasurer Sahdev Yadav, Joint Secretary Alaknanda Ashok, and other Executive Council members Amitabh Sharma, Bhupender Singh Bajwa, Rohit Rajpal, Dola Banerjee, and Yogeshwar Dutt were physically present at the meeting.

Joint Secretary Kalyan Chaubey and Executive Council member Harpal Singh participated online.

The members agreed that while a “CEO is essential and must be appointed,” they collectively voted against Raghuram Iyer’s nomination for the position.

“…the agenda was to put to vote where the 10 physical members and 2 members who joined online expressed their dissent on the agenda and the vote was 12 against the ratification of the CEO.” “…the acting CEO Kalyan Chaubey, who is the Joint Secretary of the IOA, shall continue to discharge the duties as per the provisions laid out in the Constitution,” the statement of the majority EC members said.

Usha, for her part, asserted that the Executive Council members had reneged on their commitment, as they had initially agreed to the appointment of the CEO during the January meeting.

“The EC meeting held in January was video-recorded. I asked each one of them whether they agree to the appointment of Iyer as the CEO or not. All of them said Iyer is good and everything about him is all right. Only his salary will have to be negotiated,” she stated.

“I asked them what is the lower rate (limit) and what is the higher limit of his salary. That (salary) they did not mention.

“Then his (Iyer’s) appointment was done and I communicated it to IOC and OCA and everybody accepted it.” The bone of contention is the Rs 20 lakh per month salary for Iyer, along with other perks.

Usha pointed out that in the Thursday meeting, she had agreed to renegotiate Raghuram Iyer’s salary, but the 12 members of the Executive Council were adamant over resuming the appointment process. She further expressed that this new stalemate might push India’s chance to host the 2036 Olympics off the track.

“Only after the appointment (of the CEO) was done, the Future Host Commission agreed to have a dialogue with us, otherwise they would not agree to it. The CEO will have to lead the negotiations, we have to show professionalism, otherwise how would we got to present our bid?” she asked.

Usha remarked that the IOC could have taken a drastic step even before the Paris Olympics but chose not to, highlighting the gravity of the situation.

“I was there, that is why IOC was waiting for two years. It (IOC action) could have happened before Paris Olympics but they waited.

“Iyer was in the Co-ordination Committee and not the IOA president, that was why we could compete under Indian flag and not under the IOC flag.”

Usha stated that both Raghuram Iyer and her personal assistant, Ajay Narang—whose appointment was “cancelled” by the majority of Executive Council members—have not received their salaries since their appointments.