Confusion as multiple Olympic associations registered in Chandigarh

The registration of the Chandigarh Olympics Association (COA) under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, is as confusing as the existence of the ‘now-defunct’ sports body. In a recent revelation, it has been found that three associations, with nearly identical names, have been registered under the 1860 Act in Chandigarh, raising doubts over their authenticity and possibility of involvement of government officials or private persons in making the sports body a ‘hub of politics’.

Sources claimed that three bodies — Chandigarh Olympic Association Chandigarh (No 280, registered on August 23, 1976), Chandigarh Olympic Association (No 550, registered on January 24, 1980) and Chandigarh Olympic Association Chandigarh (No 1633, registered on September 18, 1989) — were registered under the Act.

The registration of the body No 280 was cancelled on January 22, 1980, by the then Registrar of Societies.

Notably, as per the records of Chandigarh Sports Council, the COA documentation addressed the association as Chandigarh Olympic Association Chandigarh. “The association shall be called ‘Chandigarh Olympic Association, Chandigarh, herein after referred to as Association,” read the file. Interestingly, the document neither carried the registration number of the association and nor the previous official letter pad of the COA. “The politics in COA was deep-rooted, which even the Sports Department officials failed to understand. Even an eight-page document with the sports council didn’t carry the exact registration number of the association. The department has reportedly written to the authorities, seeking a clarification on the same. A proper audit should be marked if the other two registered bodies have ever taken any government grant,” claimed an official of UT Administration.

He added, “Under the Act, the identical names cannot be granted. However, since the registration of one body was cancelled in 1980, the name may have been allotted.”

After infighting in the COA, some affiliated units had approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

In January, Justice Kuldeep Tiwari had ordered a fresh election to the association and directed the Chandigarh Deputy Commissioner to appoint an ‘Administrator’ for the same. After almost a month, DC Nishant Kumar Yadav appointed Hari Kallikkat as the ‘Administrator’. In May, Kallikkat further assigned two DANICS (Delhi, Andaman & Nicobar, Lakshadweep, Daman & Diu and Dadra & Nagar Haveli, Civil Services) officers — Khushpreet Kaur and Amit — the work of conducting the elections. Khushpreet has been tasked with preparing electoral rolls and Amit has been appointed returning officer.

Chandigarh