AMU Special Centres: A Dispassionate Analysis of Legal Impossibility

Dear all, ASAK
I am responding with a sense of desperation regarding the sentiments expressed by Mr. Sajjad which are symptomatic of many other persons at AMU, that despite everything else 'the establishment of Centres is a big achievement of AMU'.This sentiment has dominated the web space but not the real world, where there is a gut feeling that something is not quite right but, there are not enough cogent arguments to articulate the feeling. I am worried about whom to address? and, Whom to focus on? As far as AMU Centres are concerned. There is total confusion on what has been done? Who has done what? What are we trying to do? There is no reason to doubt anybody's sincerety on either side of the divide except of course of politicians, those with a questionable past and their hangers on. Except for these everyone has the best interests of the institution at heart.
At the risk of being taken to be long winded, pedantic, heavy and also confused I would invite you to consider the following:
There are three main issues involved here, that may be asked as questions and whose answers may help in bringing clarity, the first issue is who benefits from these centers? The second is, is it beneficial or harmful for the university as an institution to go ahead with this endevour? And the final question (which is connected to the second) is do the existing laws make any provision to set up centers or shall we have to go in for amendment of the Act?
Let's start with a rhetorical question
"Who benefits from these Centers?"
Answer would be "Muslims obviously"
The next question should be 'How?'
This is where you do not have a glib response, you have to pause and ponder, because the University does not reserve seats for Muslims and, has never done so except a misadventure recently which is now in the Supreme Court of India, it does not give preferential admission to Muslims, it in fact is barred by law to practise any sort of discrimination.
So 'How?' still remains unanswered!
An additional weak argument that, these centers are in Muslim majority areas so more Muslims would get in, doesn't hold water as admission is by merit not by region or religion.
Additionally you only have to look at the statements made by Mr. Nitish Kumar and by the VC Prof Azis that these centers shall not have any reservation for Muslims and they are open to everyone. Similar statements regarding AMU in the context of minority colleges and institutions have also been made by the Minority affairs minister Mr. Salman Khursheed.
The logical corollary of the above would be ‘Then why this song and dance about the centers?’
This is where a little reflection would reveal the dirty business of politics, all political parties know that Muslims have been left behind on all fronts but there is a small increasingly vocal elite (comprising retired civil servants, professionals in various fields, NRIs , moulavis and caste leaders), which is articulating the sense of deprivation and demanding action and answers.
So politicians have resorted to tokenism, the lead as always being taken by the Congress party in states where elections are due, where Muslims are more aware of the lack of development in their areas and community. The ruling combine in these states also want Muslims to continue supporting them, so we have competitive populism where no one wants to be labeled a laggard or being perceived as grudging Muslims their place in the sun, so a university which world over is recognized as a beacon of hope for modern scientific outlook among Muslims is being projected to play a role which it never sought to play.
The Aligarh Muslim University was never intended or conceived to be the University Grants Commission of Indian Muslims, if any government or any governing party is serious about Muslim education then they should open colleges and universities which can cater to the Muslims. Why drag AMU into a role which would destroy whatever we have, whatever we have achieved. Let me clarify a bit:--
There are two broad types of university models in India (here universities, public funded and private can only be established by legislation) one is a unitary type with a bound and defined campus as well as properly demarcated areas of jurisdiction, these are generally residential universities;
The other is the affiliating type which has a broad area of jurisdiction extending over many districts and which have affiliated colleges that admit students independent of the University, but basic eligibility norm is set by the university concerned, they teach syllabi set by the university, students appear in exams decided by the university. Sometimes these universities also have post graduate departments but most of the time they are glorified examination boards, individual teachers especially in the colleges have no control over the syllabus, method of evaluation, evaluators etc, that are all decided by boards at the University level which also have some teacher representatives, in essence individual teachers have no autonomy.
On the other hand unitary universities like AMU, BHU and nearly all Central Universities, have a governance structure where teachers decide what is to be taught, how it is to be taught, how it is to be evaluated and who would evaluate it, similarly they decide who is to be admitted how they are to be admitted, and what is the eligibility condition(s). Here teachers also decide the creation, up gradation of teaching posts and their fields of specialization at the time of creation, teachers are also empowered to decide on topics for research and supervisors, we at AMU are also privileged to decide which conference to organize at Aligarh and on what theme/topic. All this is possible because our Act and other similar Acts have a provision of the Board of Studies at the lowest level which comprises of all the teachers of the Department along with certain other persons including those who are conducting research in the Department. This very significant provision is not properly understood by persons working or coming from non unitary universities such as most state universities, like B.R.Ambedkar University, Agra or Bundelkhand University, Jhansi or Kerala University.
The point to be understood here is that if a Center is established what kind of structure would we have there? Shall we have one Department in Aligarh? In that case what happens to the teachers teaching at these so called centers, what kind of control shall they have over the courses they would be teaching? Shall we have parallel Departments at these new places? But these are prohibited by law and even in Delhi University which also has powers of an affiliating University the South campus and the original North campus do not have duplicate departments. World over Residential Universities are accepted as better institutions for teaching and research.
The Government of the day understands all these niceties and intricacies as the passage of the Central Universities Act in 2009 shows, where all these sensibilities of jurisdiction and all India character are taken into account, around the same time the Delhi Government also realized the need for a residential University so a new university was proposed to be established in Delhi. It is interesting to note that all these new Central Universities and all the previously established Central Universities have a territorial jurisdiction. I.e. everywhere the respective Act gives the boundaries of their influence . Only a few Institutions have a pan India jurisdiction such as the Maulana Azad National Urdu University, Jawaharlal Nehru University, Indira Gandhi National Open University so they are in the true sense of the term, exceptions. This is so because we have borrowed our model from the British where the norm is the Residential system as it prevails in say Oxford and Cambridge.
What I am trying to prove is that even if you accept the concept of the so called “Centers, Special Centers, Advanced Centers, Campuses” nothing can be established without amending the University Act as it exists at present. It is all a political mirage which vested interests are interested to display till the next elections at least.
Now that the Muslim advantage/benefit mirage is out of the way let us see what the University has done under the existing provisions about setting up the so called centers:--
A suggestion was made by the University Court in Dec2007 to set up advanced centers ‘in principle’, in Jan 2008 the Executive Council of the University accepted the suggestion to establish, hold your breath, satellite campuses, now I don’t have to tell anyone that nomenclature is a very important thing, so did anyone have or still has clarity on what was/is being proposed, except that something was being set up. In Feb 2008 I.e., before any other authority of the University had considered the proposal a letter was sent to the President of India to accord ‘In principle’ approval of the so called special centers/parallel campuses/ centers of the AMU. What is the laid down procedure in the Act if something much smaller in scale is to be attempted such as a Department of Studies or a center like Women Studies or Career Planning Center or Cardiology Center or Endocrinology center is set up:
According to the Section 28(5) of the University Act any member of the University court may make any proposal which if approved shall be considered at its next meeting by the EC it reads (5) Any member of the Court may propose to the Court, the draft of any Statute and the Court may reject the proposal or refer such draft for consideration to the Executive Council, which may either reject the proposal or submit the draft to the Court in such form as the Executive Council may approve and…**This is then followed by a reference to Section28(3) which reads
(3) The Executive Council may propose to the Court the draft of any Statutes for its consideration and such draft shall be considered by the Court at its next meeting: Provided that the Executive Council shall not propose the draft of any Statute or of any amendment of a Statute affecting the status powers or constitution of any authority of the University until such authority has been given an opportunity of expressing an opinion in writing upon the proposal and any opinion so expressed shall be considered by the Court. This is the procedure referred to in the last part of the Subsection(5) which reads …**the provisions of this section shall apply in the case of any draft so submitted as they apply in the case of a draft proposed by the Executive Council. i.e. as given in subsection3.
Now in case you are getting confused permit me to lay down the procedure of any change in the university structure
1. A proposal for setting up a new department or centre can emanate from any of the Authorities of the University viz. the Faculty(ies), the Academic Council, the Executive Council and the University Court and sometimes also from the Board of Studies which is not an authority. All this however is subject to the following
1.1. Statute 20(2) which reads as follows (2) (a) Each Faculty shall consist of such Departments as may be assigned to it by the Ordinances.
(b) No Department shall be established or abolished except by the Statutes.
1.2. And Section 2(e) of the Act reads (e) “Department” means a Department of Studies and includes a Centre of Studies established by the Ordinances;
2. In both cases, whether the proposal came from the top or the bottom, it is first discussed in all democratic bodies and if it is accepted by all then the procedure of change in Statute or Ordinance is taken up which only starts at the lowest level of the BOS and goes up to the University Court.
2.1. At all places where powers are assigned the phrase “Subject to the Act, the Statutes and the Ordinances”is given this includes Section 12(2) of the Act which talks of sanction of the Visitor.
2.2.What should be understood by this phrase except that you can only do which is allowed, not that which is not allowed in the Act.
2.3. The Act very categorically says in the preamble the intention to set up a ‘Teaching and residential university at Aligarh’ it also says at Section 5(9A) “Twenty five Kilometers of the University Mosque” also “special centers”. The actual language at both 5(9A) and Section 12(2) is reproduced below
Section 5*(9A) to establish within a radius of twenty five kilometres of the University Mosque such special Centres, specialized Laboratories or other units for research and instruction as are, in the opinion of the University, necessary for the furtherance of its objects;
Section 12(2) The University may also, with the sanction of the Visitor and subject to the Statutes and Ordinances, *establish and maintain such Special Centres, Specialized Laboratories or such other institutions for research or instruction as are necessary for the furtherance of its objects either on its own or in cooperation or collaboration with any other institution.
Additionally even Section 12(1) which s concerned with schools also talks of 15 miles, so the intention of the lawmakers are obvious, no expansion beyond a physical limit.
2.4 An example from the past may be looked at. During the tenure of Prof Naseem Farooqui as VC 1990—1994, the then PVC Prof Abul Hasan Siddiqui had come up with a proposal to set up a new Medical College near Lucknow at Sitapur road for which land was also being made available. Then also many well meaning individuals had welcomed the proposal and had seen in it the future of the University, however there was disquiet on the campus because it was seen as opening the backdoor to a permanent harmful change to the University’s structure, but in keeping with our traditions very few were willing to make their disquiet known on record.
When the matter came up in the Academic Council it was passed by majority vote but there were three notes of dissent which spelt out the above provisions, stressed that ‘subject to…’ can only mean that which is allowed and; that before any further processing, the matter be referred to the Ministry of Law, Govt. of India. This was the end of the matter.
2.5 Similarly Centers set up during the tenure of Mr.Mahmoodur Rahman as VC 1995—2000, were wound up later, during Mr. Hamid Ansari’s tenure, as not being in consonance with the Act, Statutes and Ordinances.
3. What is a ‘Special Center’ or a ‘Specialised Laboratory’, this obviously is something which does not exist in the University but the University feels that this requirement/gap/ needs to be filled up, so a provision is made in the rules to fill up such a lacunae. It definitely does not allow the setting up of parallel departments or campuses anywhere.
3.1 The President is said to have given her consent ‘in principle’ for ‘Centers’ under Section 12(2), this section covers only special centers so what is this entity “Centers”? and what does “in Principle” mean? Does it mean the idea is prima facie acceptable but, a proper concrete proposal is required when a final view and decision shall be taken. It does not by any stretch of imagination allow for teaching to start in a makeshift manner. What happens to the ‘Brand AMU’ for which a high profile committee was set up? Even those who concede the basic principle of centers being setup are worried, is this how we shall provide degrees in a half baked manner and with makeshift faculty and facilities? Shall we have a different admission policy for these places? Who is an internal student here and who is not? Even if admission is offered to students currently studying here in the internal quota will they go there ? What shall be the final profile of the students and the teaches? These are the questions the supporters of the idea are asking but, don’t have the nerve to ask in public for fear of annoying the VC. Maybe this why in all elections held recently an overwhelming number, more than three fourths, voted against persons perceived to be supported by the administration. Why are we in such a tearing hurry to destroy everything? Just as that half baked idea of Muslim reservation destroyed decades of our quiet work in education.
4. It follows, therefore, that the proposal is bound by two limits; it should not breach the 25 Km limit and, it can only be within the existing system i.e. it should not tinker with the basic structure of the Institution which is at Aligarh and which is residential. I would like to draw your attention to the doctrine of the basic structure of the Constitution which has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, I suggest it is a similar case here at AMU.
4.1 How is the basic structure to be determined? A basic structure involves institutional goals and aspirations as well as methods and powers to achieve them, through a laid down system of academic and administrative information flow and decision making which has to be processed through certain authorities (bodies). All Government institutions including AMU have this system in place for anyone to analyse and discuss, for AMU it is ___ Teaching and residential at Aligarh along with the Department and Faculty system with local decision making.
I have it on the authority of one of the most distinguished scholars ever produced by this University, a name which has and still inspires awe in academia, that the AMU Act shall require amendments before any of the Centers(?) as conceived by the present administration see the light of the day. I had respectfully argued that this will change the university as we know it and, although we have not been brilliant and outstanding, except for notable exceptions, we may even be harmed and, loose whatever we have achieved and have come to stand for. I also raised questions of academic governance and administrative organisation which I have already spelt out above, we are not able to properly manage a bound campus, how would we manage a far flung atomized structure? His answer was illuminating. He said it is politics and it is the politics of governance and, every political party is making use of the opportunity being offered. He also mentioned that if the proposal is to work, separate universities shall have to be set up, in the present form it seems to be unworkable as regional feelings and aspirations shall come into play. As ours was an informal discussion it shall not be proper to mention names, but I hope readers shall get the general picture of disquiet that most of us have here.
I hope I have answered the third question I had posed at the beginning of this letter, that the present Act does not allow such centers to be set up.
Finally, after the third question let me try to answer the second question I posed earlier, let me try to do it without using the term Muslim as Mr. Hamid Ansari, during his tenure as VC here, was fond of asking us to do. The second question was ‘does it benefit AMU as an institution to go in for these changes’ meaning does the stature of AMU increase or as our present VC is fond of saying does ‘Brand AMU’ gain prestige ? The answer very categorically is NO. Why? Well because we as an institution have not contributed very much in pure academic terms except the individual brilliance of scholars who can be counted on our fingers. No doubt we have also had great litterateurs but they just happened to be here, they were creators, not interpreters or analysts or great teachers. So brand AMU is known more for the total individual it produces a strange mixture of a sardonic wit, an appreciator of all good things of life but, a person who retains a sense of belonging and so remembers that one should do something for society, a person who is simultaneously both religious as well as irreligious with a healthy dose of skepticism thrown in. This product is produced in Aligarh, in the hostels, library, classrooms here. It would not be produced in a Kishanganj and Murshidabad or Mallapuram or Bhopal or Pune, and I am not being snobbish or denigrating anyone or any place here. The individual who wants to do something for the deprived sections of society can be and is produced elsewhere also, but it is only here that you get an Aligarian which I fear you would not get elsewhere.
As I am writing this Aligarh is being lashed by a high intensity wind storm very soon electricity shall go off and we know that it will not be soon before it is restored.
Today is May 30,2010 the VC is in a high profile meeting in Delhi (all senior officers were asked to accompany him), this is to be followed by a press conference where we shall get to know the laurels AMU is earning, the new centers, the new courses we shall be having etc. This place which is said to contain a high concentration of educated persons of all communities, including the highest concentration of educated Muslims in India is being ignored. On the other hand, people who left India many years back, who are working in different systems with different models of education, where social justice has a different connotation and different solutions are being roped in to give advice. Why? Is it because they add glamour? It is not that these persons will not or cannot contribute, of course they will, with their differing experiences, bring a new perspective to the table, but the framework has to be according to our needs and requirements and drawn up by us, who live that reality, not someone who has a romaticised notion of the past, these experts should come in only after a basic plan has been agreed upon not earlier.
Here on the Campus there is no electricity since yesterday i.e more than 24 hours. Supply has been restored in the city, where we all know there is corruption all round, last night itself. In our great campus which is planning to open centers and what no, the students who are appearing in exams have been left to fend for themselves in this sweltering heat where there is no electricity in any Hall, MA Library, Department etc. They (students) are not making any hue and cry although they see that the central offices continue to have electricity for ACs, the VC’s lodge is lit up in total darkness all-round like always, unique like an oasis in a sea of sand, they are quietly preparing for their exams. These are the same ‘rowdy students’ for whom we require a continuous surveillance system with high tech cameras and all. Incidentally three camera towers including the control tower have come down; this is an indicator of the slipshod quality control we practice, even for things that we passionately espouse.
Today is May 31,2010 still no electricity still no change, the University has money to put in place a high tech security structure because it has played upon the latent muslim phobia of the security apparatus, it has no money to put up electricity poles, lack of the latter adversely affects research, teaching, learning ,exams; lack of the former only affects the pockets of the suppliers and the psychological state of the administration. The employees of the Electricity Department are working tirelessly to restore supply but the Land & Gardens office is sitting idle, it has not moved to remove the broken trees and their branches from the roads and electricity cables and poles. We do not have a disaster response system, every year we have storms, every year we have rains, every year we have recurring crises but we have knee jerk reactions; we are so involved in our support to the administration that we forget to tell the emperor about the clothes he is wearing.
I hope I have been able to put across a point of view which you would understand and respond to.


S. Mustafa Zaidi [s_mustafa_zaidi@yahoo.co.in]
Department of Library Sciences
Aligarh Muslim University
Aligarh-202002 (INDIA)


(The writer is a senior faculty member and the message was posted on worldofaligs@yahoogroups.com)