Pune: The All India Tennis Association’s (AITA) decision to replace initial nominee Leander Paes with interim president Chintan Parikh for the Indian Olympic Association’s (IOA) electoral college drew sharp criticism from federation members on Thursday.“There was a meeting of the advisory group for nominations today again. As a last-minute development, there is a change in the nominations … all the members (of the advisory group) have unanimously decided to nominate … Chintan Parikh as the male representative, and Rushmi Chakravarthi, from the Sportsperson of Outstanding Merit roster, as the female representative,” Parikh informed the AITA members, a source told The Times of India.When contacted, Parikh said in a written statement: “Mr Leander Paes was uncertain about his availability (on the day of the IOA elections). Today being the last date, the Nominations Advisory Group meeting was urgently called and it was decided unanimously that, as is customary, the president of AITA be nominated to the Electoral College of IOA.”The change triggered objections from several members, who questioned both the process and the eventual choice of nominee.“We take strong objection and are shocked to know the fact that you have neither nominated an already serving IOA member, Rohit Rajpal, nor retained Leander’s name, but have instead put forward your own name,” a member wrote to Parikh.“No EC (executive committee) meeting called, you are taking all decisions unilaterally with your own people in the so-called high-powered committee.”In the lead-up to the nominations, it is understood that Davis Cup captain Rohit Rajpal, who is also a vice-president in the AITA interim committee, had expressed his wish to be nominated, citing his experience as a member of the IOA executive committee.“We are in the process of elections and committees of just 4-5 people cannot and should not decide matters of such importance. I am already on the board of IOA and … many things get done with ease vis-à-vis IOA. At this point, personal interests and differences should be kept aside and the best interests of AITA should be kept in mind,” Rajpal had written to Parikh.Rajpal’s objections had largely subsided after Paes’ name was proposed. However, the decision to withdraw the 18-time Grand Slam champion and nominate Parikh instead reignited the controversy.“It is one of the most shameful days in the history of (Indian) sport, in particular tennis, that in this time and age, a 69-year-and-eight-month-old sports administrator sends his name for Olympic Association, rather than a tennis player. I am disappointed that after doing so much for these organisations, I have to sit out,” Rajpal wrote.Parikh defended the process and rejected suggestions that the nomination was improper.“So far, nomination decisions were taken arbitrarily by the president/secretary. I had suggested the formation of an advisory group at the last Executive Committee meeting and the same was approved,” he said.“It is 100% legal as per the constitution of AITA. Forming a group of EC members is better than a single person taking a decision. The decision was taken unanimously.”On whether the Delhi High Court-appointed Administrator had been made aware of the formation of the advisory group, Parikh said: “The administrator has no role in this matter, as this is an operational matter that has nothing to do with any financial commitment as per the court order.”
