IOA electoral officer says he had no power to act on alleged SOM election violations
In New Delhi on November 12, 2026, Indian Olympic Association Electoral Officer Sanjay Kumar Srivastava said he did not have the authority to take punitive action over alleged breaches of the Model Code of Conduct during the IOA’s Sportspersons of Merit (SOMs) elections. He said he responded to complaints by issuing advisories to the electors.
Srivastava, who conducted the SOMs exercise, is a former State Election Commissioner of Delhi and a retired 1980-batch IAS officer. Eighty former athletes voted online to elect four female SOMs on Monday, November 9, 2026, and IOA President P. T. Usha finished fifth among six candidates and therefore was not elected. Four male SOMs had been declared elected unopposed on November 7. He said complaints arrived in the late hours of the night before voting, which meant he could not delay polling.
Usha lodged a complaint to Mr. Srivastava alleging that former archer Dola Banerjee violated the Model Code of Conduct by circulating a WhatsApp message soliciting votes. Commonwealth Games gold-winning weightlifter Sathish Sivalingam also lodged a complaint to Mr. Srivastava that "an organised effort is underway to influence members of the Electoral Roll in favour of a contesting candidate who is also the President of the Indian Olympic Association". Both complaints reached him in the late hours of November 8.
On his remit, Srivastava said: "The thing is that, I have no power to take punitive action (against alleged rule violations). I cannot disqualify anybody, I cannot cancel elections. I have no power to do that. I can only ask them (SOMs) to refrain from violating the Model Code of Conduct, which I did promptly," he told PTI. "Moreover, I would not have delayed the elections under the circumstances (complaints came just hours before elections). My job is to conduct free and fair elections." He added that any action for alleged violation of rules could be taken only after the elections and by other authorities like the Ethics Committee of the IOA.
Srivastava said he acted immediately after receiving the complaints late on November 8, even though it was Diwali. "After I received the complaints, I called my staff and took prompt action. I sent out mails to all the 80 SOMs, including the complainants, to refrain from doing anything not allowed by the Model Code of Conduct," Mr. Srivastava said. "It was the Diwali night, and voting was to start next day morning at 9 a.m. On the day of the elections, they lodged another complaint wherein they (the complainants) quoted the actions taken by me on November 8. So, how can they say that I have not acted?"
He set out the safeguards used for the online vote and the scope of available records. "The 80 SOMs voted from around 20 places, from foreign countries, from Manipur, while inside trains. I wrote to all the SOMs that their IP address will be checked. They were told not to do proxy voting and not to take a photo (screenshot after voting). "There was so much precaution. Nobody could vote from another person's phone. First, the photo will be identified, then the OTP will be sent. Then you can vote." He said he holds details including IP addresses and voting locations and would provide them if requested by authorities.
"An electoral officer should be a neutral person, and I am a neutral person. I am not going to be influenced by anybody or anything. I cannot allow my reputation to be tarnished. I believe I have conducted a free and fair election as far as the SOM elections are concerned," Mr. Srivastava said. He added that any aggrieved party can approach "appropriate forums" to address their grievances and that he will submit records or documents if he is asked to.
