AMU Centres “stand established forthwith” (PRO).

Buk raha hoon junon may kya kya
Kuch na samjhe khuda kare koi

The press note from the Public Relations Office dated June 8, 2010 in exact consonance with the Registrar’s notification (D.No ©/ 702 dated 7-6-10) (could be an exercise to preempt the Stay granted by the Hon’ble Kerala High Court on 7-6-10 is the most shameless exhibition of the misuse of official position and misinterpretation of laws and twisted facts to please the Masters in Delhi, in total disregard of the interests of the Aligarh Muslim University and a jolt to the hopes and aspirations of the Muslim Community.
The undeniable fact that the recent communication of the Visitor (27-4-10) was in response to the request of the VC (not authorized by the Competent Authorities of the University) but to Mr. Sunil Kumar, Joint Secretary, MHRD to release 50 crores earmarked in the Union Budget of 2009 for Murshidabad and Mallapuram. There was no request from the VC at all to accord sanction for Special Centres under Section 12 (2) of the University Act.
The episode has also exposed the Ministry of Human Resource Development thoroughly and brings to light that the letter of the Visitor containing her ‘approval in principle’ for the new Centres, was manipulated and appears to have not been processed through the prescribed channels nor the Visitor apprised of the facts. Govt. should take serious note of this.
In his eagerness to cover up the blunder on the part of the Ministry of Human Resource Development, the Registrar vainly tried to link up the Visitor’s letter with the VC’s communication of 13-2-2008 to Shri Arjun Singh but got caught on the wrong foot- this VC’s communication claims the so called approval of the Court, Executive council and Academic Council on the basis of which the present Visitor’s sanction was purported to have been accorded, is a lie. In doing so, the Registrar lost sight of the fact that the meeting of the said AC was held on 5-12.1-09 and letter to the Visitor was sent on 13-2-2008.
Moreover, in the absence of the approval of AC till 13-2-2008 and the fact that the Vice Chancellor’s letter did not mention the approval of the AC, where was the possibility for the Visitor to accord sanction and this letter incidentally referred for the creation of AMU Campuses not Special Centres and the letter was not responded to by the MHRD leave alone the Visitor’s sanction as claimed by the Registrar of the Aligarh Muslim University, a deliberate mis-statement. The Registrar has tried to hoodwink the public by furnishing false information on several counts which certainly is a penal offence.
Not only this, the Visitor cannot and should not consider according sanction to any plan or scheme unless the concerned Statute/Ordinance is amended by the relevant Authorities of the University. The manner in which the VC and his Office have placed the matter before the public, media, the President of India (who is also the Visitor of the university) is extremely deplorable and warrants strong disciplinary action and condemnation to stop this persistent irresponsible behavior.
The often repeated claims of Prof. Azis that Special Centres have the approval of the relevant Authorities of the University are quite misleading. The truth is that the University Court suggested four Centres for Muslims( 2-12-2007); Executive Council approved five Centres for Advanced Studies and Research (17-1-2008) and the Academic Council approved Special Centres (5-12,1,2009) for Muslims. There was no agreement on whether there should be Centres, Advance Centres or Special Centres. It ought to be pointed out here that these three categories are totally different from each other in their nature, content and objectives. Besides, Campuses were also frequently bandied about to make the confusion worse confounded. The number and locations were never finally approved by the relevant Authorities. The Vice Chancellor, who is not competent to take a decision on his own in this regard, had the audacity to decide not only about these Centres but also had the insolence to change the location, from Katihar to Kishenganj. More importantly, the prescribed procedure contained under Section 28 and 29 (2) of initiating the matter from Faculty to AC, EC and the Court (strictly in this order), incorporating the necessary amendments in the Statutes/ Ordinances to be passed on to the Visitor for approval and then to place it before both Houses of Parliament for approval (Section 31 (4) and (5)) has not been followed at all; rendering the entire exercise, claims and pronouncements of the Vice Chancellor and the recent decisions of the Board of Studies of two departments and the meeting of the Academic Council of 8-6-2010, as exercises in futility. Seen in this context, the release of Rs. 35 crores to the Vice Chancellor without the approval of the Authorities and necessary amendments to the rules is extremely objectionable and the MHRD owes an explanation and should act fast enough to retrieve the situation from getting out of hands.
In the light of the above, no sane person can agree with the insane assertion of the Registrar that “these Centres stand established forthwith”. Surprisingly, in the very next breath, the Registrar admits that ‘required modifications will be made in the relevant Statutes and Ordinances and notified separately’. This, besides refuting the claim of establishment of Centres also contradicts the assertion of Prof. Azis (The Hindu, Kerala, 18-1-2009) that amendments of Statutes is not required, the sanction of the Visitor would be sufficient.
The misleading of the University Community in particular and the public in general, by spreading lies, half truths, concealment of facts and generation of avoidable controversies, call for the removal of the incompetent Registrar forthwith, even if the notification in reference was issued at the behest of the Vice Chancellor. The Vice Chancellor cannot escape vicarious responsibility for the said notification. In fact, he has forfeited the right to continue in Office long back.
One can understand the concerns, pressures, agony and mental imbalance of person faced with an adverse report by the Cochin University Inquiry, CAG report, 2009 and the ongoing Visitor’s Inquiry. The allegations coupled with determined opposition and strong public opinion further added to his miseries closing all routes to escape. Under these circumstances, the only course open to a sensible, self respecting and educated person, is to call it a day and quit gracefully instead of pulling strings, day in and day out, to get out of the mess ( which is his own creation) with the help of the political bosses, who are nobody’s friends when the tides turn against.

Prof. Ziauddin Ahmad (Retd.)
Dept of Botany
AMU, Aligarh