The Hindu : Move to nominate RDOs as Member Secretaries flayed

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Feb 19, 2003

Sport

Sport - Sports : General

Move to nominate RDOs as Member Secretaries flayed

By V.V. Subrahmanyam

HYDERABAD FEB. 18. Redefining sports administration in the State? Well, that seems to be the intention. But, the move to nominate Revenue Divisional Officers or Deputy Superintendents of Police as Member Secretaries of the District Sports Authorities with the avowed objective of streamlining the key area of tapping and nursing talent at grassroot level will create serious consequences as the existing District Sports Development Officers have to work under them. This will be a deviation from the present scenario in which they remain the link between the District Collectors and the Sports Authority of Andhra Pradesh. The new move, the DSDOs strongly feel, will make their future uncertain.

With the exception of a few cases, the majority of the 23 districts in the State have DSDOs, work under the control of the District Collector, who happens to be the chairperson of the DSA also.

By continuing to incorporate the controversial Government Order No.25 (dated 1992) even in the latest booklet of rules and regulations for the Sports Authority of Andhra Pradesh and that too with an important appendix relating to this issue, the top brass of the sports administration seems to be determined to use the option as per its discretion.

It may be grossly unfair to dub all the DSDOs as ineffective. This nation is surviving and moving ahead because of the sincerity and commitment of a few sections. Thus, this move is surprising considering the fact that the authorities are already armed with powers to take care of the erring DSDOs.

There is also the view that some of the DSDOs are not performing over the years and are still enjoying the `benefits' with handsome salaries ranging from Rs. 15,000 to Rs. 20,000. This can be a fair reflection of the total indifference of the top brass towards this vital element in sports administration, as they have to come up with performance indicators and dole out the punishment transfers.

If the authorities feel that the best alternative for an inefficient DSDO is the RDO or the DSP, then it may be a gross misconception. For the simple reason, these two posts in the district administration are very powerful by virtue of the powers they have and they also cannot spare enough time for sports. "There is also every possibility of the RDO or the DSP being very autocratic in his style of functioning,'' says a DSDO.

To substantiate this viewpoint, the case of various sports associations headed by top police officers is cited. It is an acknowledged fact that elections are never held in a true democratic manner once these officials are there as key office-bearers in the Sports Associations.

The elections are invariably reduced to a show of strength by mere rising of hands. It is anybody's guess how many can dare to do it against a police official contesting or supporting an important office-bearer. This has been going on with the primary objective of putting down the dissenting voice.

Apparently, by virtue of their limited knowledge in sports, these RDOs and DSPs may not necessarily provide the right link between the State and the Districts. And, how receptive these gentlemen can be because of their influential nature at that level is another big question.

Here, it is also recalled that the Member Secretaries concept, which was there in early 80's was a big flop, as these posts were doled out to some of the `influential' candidates at the district level and majority of them have not even submitted the accounts.

So, the general perception is that instead of creating confusion in an already disjointed set-up, it would be better off to enhance the district sports budget from the nominal Rs. 1 lakh per annum of which 30 per cent goes to the salaries and another 20 per cent for disbursing allowances to the few sportspersons who wish to compete.

Ironically, the allocation is the same even now when the SAAP annual budget is about Rs. 36 crore or when it hovering around Rs. 3 crore a couple of years ago. Make the DSDOs accountable and frame a rule that can arm the higher authorities to demote, promote or deny increments.

There seems to be something amiss somewhere down the line.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Sport