New Delhi, Feb 28 (PTI) The president of Indian Olympic Association does not have the power to unilaterally take over the affairs of a state association and a proposal to appoint an ad-hoc body has to be taken up by its general assembly, the Delhi High Court has ruled.

Justice Sachin Datta therefore set aside an order by Indian Olympic Association (IOA) president P T Usha on January 1 constituting an ad-hoc committee to look after the affairs of Bihar Olympic Association.

Also Read | News Headlines for School Assembly Today, 01 March 2025: Check Important National, International, Sports, Entertainment and Business Stories.

The court directed the petitioner to hold its elections within three months, failing which, the IOA was free to take appropriate disciplinary action.

Bihar Olympic Association, represented by advocate Neha Singh, challenged the decision on several grounds, including the argument that the constitution of the ad-hoc committee was done unilaterally by the president, against the rules and regulations of the Indian Olympic Association.

Also Read | EPFO Decides To Retain Interest Rate on Employees' Provident Fund at 8.25% for 2024-25; Proposal To Be Sent to Ministry of Finance for Clearance.

On February 24, Justice Datta said constituting an ad-hoc body “to look after the affairs” of the a state association was akin to suspending its executive committee and under the IOA's constitution, such power was conferred on the general assembly of the IOA and not the president.

"A perusal of the Constitution of the IOA reveals that the president, IOA does not have any power to unilaterally take over the affairs of any SOA (State Olympic Association).. As such, any proposal to take over, to suspend and/or appoint an ad-hoc body 'to look after the affairs' of the SOA concerned should have been taken by the general assembly of the IOA," the court said.

The IOA president couldnt be considered to have the power to constitute an ad-hoc committee, it added.

The order observed initially a "single-member fact finding commission" was appointed by the president but a copy of the complaints and representations was not forwarded to the petitioner to elicit their response in the enquiry.

There was no occasion for the petitioner to deal with the specific allegations against it or the report of the commission and the "entire enquiry appears to have happened behind the back of the state olympic association concerned, it added.

The court clarified that the president of the IOA had the power to form various commission or committees but an ad-hoc committee for a state body, which is a constituent member of the IOA, was not a “committee”.

"The impugned action on the part of the president, IOA in constituting an ad-hoc committee 'to look after the affairs' of the Bihar Olympic Association does not satisfy the requirements of law," the court held.

(The above story is verified and authored by Press Trust of India (PTI) staff. PTI, India’s premier news agency, employs more than 400 journalists and 500 stringers to cover almost every district and small town in India.. The views appearing in the above post do not reflect the opinions of LatestLY)