PT Usha Slams Boxing Federation Of India, Defends Need For Ad-Hoc Committee To ‘Restore Order’

The PT chief of the Indian Olympic Association (IOA) USHA defended his decision on Tuesday to appoint an ad hoc committee for boxing, saying that the National Federation had not fulfilled its “fundamental responsibilities” in the past year and that its action was necessary to “restore order and ensure good governance”. His statement came in response to the letter from the Vice-President of the IOA, Gagan Narang, on February 28, in which the former Olympic bronze winner accused him of having issued “arbitrary” orders and undergoing the well-being of athletes.

Usha’s unshakable position is despite the suspension of the High Court of Delhi on the IOA prescription. The court published an opinion, requesting the response from the IOA to a petition tabled by the India boxing federation (BFI).

“… There is no truth in your assertion (Narang) that athletes suffer because of this decision or any alleged arbitrary action on my part. The decision to appoint an ad hoc committee was not arbitrary, but a necessary step to restore order, ensure good governance and give priority to the development of athletes,” USHA said in his response to Narang, who is also a member of the Council Executive IOA.

“The unfortunate reality is that BFI has failed to fulfill its fundamental responsibilities, in particular the production of national championships in the past year.

“With the 2026 Asian Games approaching quickly, there has been little or no effort to identify new talents, select promising boxers and implement structured training programs to improve India medal prospects.” USHA, who has disagreed with the members of the Executive Council on several questions, accused them of showing “a disproportionate concern” with questions of “personal preferences” rather than the overall good of Indian sports.

Narang wrote to him in search of a withdrawal from his “arbitrary” act of training from an ad hoc committee to manage BFI affairs. He said that “due to such an arbitrary order, our athletes suffer and that we get a bad reputation at the national and international level”.

On February 24, the IOA was an ad hoc committee of five members to supervise boxing cases in the country on the grounds that the National Sport Federation did not hold the elections on time.

The BFI described the “illegal” IOA decision and filed a request before the High Court of Delhi to cancel the order.

Narang also said that USHA’s decision to train the ad hoc committee to manage BFI had been made “without consultation and / or approval of the IOA”.

He had urged USHA to remember the order and to call an emergency meeting of the EC to discuss various urgent questions.

Return to Narang, the president of the IOA said that she had made several attempts in the past year to convene meetings of the Executive Council in order to discuss key issues.

“Unfortunately, these efforts have been thwarted repeatedly by members-including yourself-who have always blocked significant discussions,” she said.

“I find it difficult to remember any case where the EC has actively committed to discussions on improving the performance of athletes or the implementation of measures to improve the medal potential of India.

“The persistent reluctance to resolve these critical issues raises serious concerns about the priorities of some within AVI,” she said.

IOA has been a divided house since Usha appointed Raghuram Iyer to the CEO in January 2024.

The majority of the members of the EC opposed his appointment on the grounds that they were not correctly consulted and that his salary is too high for an organization like IOA. EC members refused to ratify the appointment of Iyer.

(With the exception of the title, this story has not been published by NDTV staff and is published from a unionized flow.)