Muslim Face of UPA Rejected by Aligarh Muslim University Community

UPA Muslim-face Rejected by A.M.U.

Mr. Salman Khurshid, the only Muslim Cabinet Minister, many Muslims so believe. They also believe that his promotion to the Cabinet rank owes to this. He is planted to mingle, appease and serve Muslim interests, if possible or at least keep them expecting, confused and guessing, somehow, in order to keep them in good humour, if not won over.

The reckoning of Mr. Salman amongst Muslims has always been low and the incident of 17th Oct, 2011 has further damaged it because the opposition of the Congress has surfaced with full fury.

Neither AMU nor UPA visualized this. However, the fault lies with Mr. Salman and the Party Bosses who failed to realize the gravity of the situation. Actually, the anger and resentment reached its nadir long ago with the coming up of the so-called AMU Centres in 2009 and simultaneous patronization of the ill-intentioned VC for the purpose, who took the liberty to plunder at will with impunity.

Mr. Salman was hurt and disappointed because he could not pay visit to the place of birth and the place close to his heart, where the glorious son of AMU, Zakir Sahab his grandfather, was the VC. His hurt is misplaced because in recent past he was the guest of this very AMUTA twice and he is welcome to Aligarh any time even now but not the way he planned to provide legitimacy and encouragement to the worst-ever VC, most probably at the behest of Party Bosses. Not only this, Mr. Salman was approached repeatedly by teachers, and well-wishers of Aligarh for help and he cannot plead ignorance of the harm done to AMU in the last four years of Azis, destroying its discipline, traditions and values, academic standards, threatening its very existence, to say the least.

The Govt. is giving the impression loud and clear that it has no power to remove the VC. Would Mr. Salman a jurist of substance, endorse this stand that there is one more person in this great democratic country after the President of India, who is above the law and he is the present AMU VC!!!

What is the purpose of inquiry after inquiry without any result? Is the government buying time so that Mr. Azis may complete his term?

All actions of the Govt. remain suspect unless immediate action is taken to remove Azis from office.

Ziauddin Ahmad and others

Prof Ziauddin Ahmad was formerly Professor in the Dept of Botany, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh. He can be raeched at

Restoration of Minority Status of AMU- NEED OF THE HOUR

A.M.U.: Restoration of Minority Status; a deception
Khat main usne alijanab kyon likha

Is main dhoka zaroor hai sufi

After long four years, Prof. Azis startled all, by constituting a committee of his trusted men, to take up the Court case pending before the Supreme Court since 2006, on priorty basis. The Members of the Committee who are novice to the issue as they were neither associated with the long drawn battle in the Courts nor at any point of time and in any way, they are involved. The members are;

Mr. Moosa Raza ex-bureaucrat, new find, who was never associated with A.M.U, so is Mr. Khawaja Shahid serving bureaucrat and a local with high local stakes, Mr. P.A. Inamdar a builder who runs educational institutions on commercial lines and a beneficiary, VC’s blind supporter in all his misdeeds in the last two years as E.C. Member; Mr. Kamal Farooqui, the aspirant for Hony. Treasurer’s post, a sort of careerist, Mr. Kazmi, lawyer, University Council in Allahabad High Court, and Prof. M. Shabbir, Deptt. of Law A.M.U, both of them are not conversant with the essential details and intricacies of the matter.

This new Committee, besides being incompetent to handle the matter properly, is out-rightly un-authorized as the VC has no such powers, specially when there is a high-powered Committee existing which was constituted by the E.C in 2008 under the Chairmanship of Justice Saghir Ahmad with members like Mr. Zafaryab Jilani and Mr. Waseem Ahmad, who are conversant with the matter.

This E.C Committee may be revived rather strengthened by co-opting Mr. Saiyed Hamid senior most Alig and ex-VC, Mr. Naseem Ahmad ex-VC, Prof. Faizan Mustafa ex-Registrar A.M.U, Mr. S. Shahabuddin and Mr. Anil Dhawan, Senior Advocate who pleaded the case in the High Court as well as Supreme Court,even if Prof. Azis is not pleased with the names.

If the intentions are noble, this is the only way out for the University otherwise, it is merely to hood wink the masses because Prof. has of late, came under severe criticism in this matter.

The Teachers Association, AMU severely criticised the VC and demanded the constitution of the committee (in their usual ignorance that there already existed a E.C committee), removal of Ejaz Maqbool, University Council and reinstating of the Dy. Registrar, (who was reinstated without holding a Inquiry, proves his innocence and VC’s drama).
That the University standing Council, failed to appear on three consecutive hearings before the Supreme Court in February and March, 2010 (Hearings held after four years), on the direction of the VC. Luckily the case was not dismissed. This calls for investigation to unearth the truth. However, to save himself the all powerful and reckless Prof. Azis, shifted the blame on the dealing Dy. Registrar and was suspended, who is totally innocent as he kept the VC and Registrar posted with the developments on day to day basis.
That the VC has been persistently harping on extending benefit to Muslims at the proposed Campuses/Centres under Section 5(2)(c) of the AMU Act in spite of the truth known to Prof. Azis and all, that the operation of this provision has been suspended by the Supreme Court in 2006 and as such when AMU is not within its powers to offer consessions to Muslim, how these proposed Centres could possibly offer concessions.

Not only this, this very Shri Azis has declared in no unequivocal terms that there shall be no quota and admission shall be made on the basis of open All India Competition. What more is required to confirm that no concession can be extended to Muslims? and slogan by the VC and all is a farce.

Despite these hard realities, vested interests amongst Muslims, like Maulana Asrarul Haq Qasmi and several others in Murshidabad and Kishanganj seem convinced with the rhetoric of the Hon’ble VC. Shame on them. They are blaming on the contrary, those who are in the interest of the University and the Muslim, possing the Centres which are against the AMU Act and shall meet the fact before the Court of law, the reservation policies in different States met.

Similarly, people are convinced with Prof. Azis when in a press statement he tried to convince rather misleads the public that he shall fully cooperate with the ongoing Visitors Inquiry. What is the need for such a public statement in the first place and secondly, after meddling with the process in whatever way possible to side track and delay the Inquiry report which has already taken one year. His intentions could only be believed if he quits office during the pendency of the Inquiry. On the contrary, he is going full throttle, rightly or wrongly, mostly wrongly, to commence teaching at Murshidabad to mislead Muslim masses there and to serve the master, Shri Pranab Mukharjee (Murshidabad his constituency), who alone can bail him out of the mess he is in. This matter of establishing Special Centres (now Regional Centres, child’s play) the MHRD is fully supporting Prof. Azis disregarding the legality of the matter and AMU residential and Minority character. Big game is on with disastrous fallen outs for us.


The vry idea of establishing Campuses or Centres or whatever mooted out with the sole intention to benefit Muslims backed by Govt. too. But with suspension of operation of the concerned statutory provision in the AMU Act by the Supreme Court and the declaration of Prof. Azis himself under the existing situation that there shall be no quota and admissions shall be made on the basis of All India Entrance Tests; it all fell like a pack of cards. Where is the remotest possibility of offering any concessions to Muslims and therefore, the need to establish Campuses etc?


Elections are near Congress has big stakes and may continue befooling and misleading Muslims at least till then and therefore the exercise is on, at full swing, speaks loud and clear that the intentions are not noble. A big game is on, without regards of the disastrous fall-outs on AMU, threatening its Residential and Minority Character directly.


Kr. Hashmat Ali Khan

Advocate (1953)

Ex-member, AMU Court
Aligarh

Former VC Naseem Ahmad Targeted by Hon’ble Azis

Kam Maya Wa Na-Ahel Wa Riyakar Hai Hamid
Lekin Yeh Na Theen Aapke Farmane Ki Batein
(Saiyid Hamid)

I was not at all surprised at the outburst of Dr. Azis against the former Vice Chancellor, Mr. Naseem Ahmad, calling his period as the darkest one in AMU history. Such remarks are expected of a person with zero credibility and doubtful integrity, which only confirms his undesirable style of functioning. The remarks are not only in bad taste but too bad for a bad report. At the outset let me make it clear that I do not hold any brief for Mr. Naseem Ahmad and I had absolutely no contact with him, as usual, when he was the Vice Chancellor.

Mr. Naseem Ahmad was the first Vice Chancellor, who had the courage and conviction to declare that the AMU is a minority institution unlike his predecessors who often referred to it as the HISTORICAL CHARACTER. They lacked the nerves to speak the truth; perhaps they considered it a wiser way. The credit of implementing the long due reservation policy also goes to Mr. Ahmad. While all the earlier VCs were jittery and avoided it. It is a different matter that the Court not only quashed reservation but the Minority status also and went ahead to declare that even the Parliament has not been so empowered. You are, however, the first and probably the last VC in having scant respect for rules and regulations, absorbed in manipulations of the worst type by spreading lies and distorting the Act, Statutes, not concerned with the development of the University or enhancement of its academic standards. Did AMU in its ignorance cause any harm to you?

Ek Do Zakhm Nahin Jism Hai Sara Chhalni
Dard Bechara Pareshan Hai Kahan Se Ut’the
(Saiyid Hamid)

However, your fate is written on the wall. Please refer to the provision of the Statute 40(2), which reads, “…any officer salaried or otherwise may be removed on either of the following grounds, i) the officer has become incapable of performing his duties…”. You have invited the wrath by proving yourself as ‘incapable’ of performing your duty in observing the rules, a major duty assigned to the VC as per Statute 3(2) and nobody else in the University. Neither Mr. Sibbal nor Mr. Pranab Mukherjee can pull you out of the grave that you have dug for yourself. Do you still believe you can escape the guillotine? No one believes your statement that you would cooperate with the Visitor’s enquiry, in progress, as long as you occupy the chair. Why the realization has come so late after one year? Another big farce. What is the game behind it?

Mr. Naseem Ahmad owing to his sincerity, devotion and commitment to the Alma Mater (the qualities you awfully lack, rather you don’t believe in) stood firm like a rock against the determined onslaught of the then BJP Government and refused to hold Central all India Test on the ground that the AMU is an autonomous Minority Institution and requires no orders from the Central Govt regarding the governance of the University. And we could raise our heads high which we deserved. In your view, he must be a fool who missed the golden opportunity to earn a place with the Masters for all times to come like you and of course several other Muslims. Some people are late learners and some never learn. You are really great as you are taking orders even from Babus like Mr. Sunil Kumar, the Jt secretary, MHRD and we have often seen running in the corridors of power and prostrating before the bureaucracy to save yourself from all the allegations against you. We know, you are very well aware of the futility of the Special Centres for Muslims, at the cost of the University’s basic character. The proposal of these centres is nothing but a glorified gimmick to appease the Masters and to mint whatever comes to hand. These Centres are like blind men sitting in a dark room in search of a black cat which is not there.

Could you tell, which provision of the University Act & Statutes etc you have not violated?

Mr. Naseem Ahmad is a God fearing Muslim, honest and sincere in his dealings, always treated students as his own children and regarded the teachers as equals (not as Vice Chancellors personal servants to accompany and follow him wherever he goes to which the students are stark witnesses. This is more than sufficient to denigrate them before their own students (Do you really know that two teacher Assistant Proctors, remain on duty with you, whenever you go out from your residence, be it your office or elsewhere). He firmly believed that if every act of student indiscipline requires police presence and rustication extreme penalties, to establish discipline, which Aligarh rejects, the system will collapse. The moment a VC resorts to the police help like you he ceases the right to continue as AMU VC, who is a leader of the community – no father hands over students to police whatever be the situation. He avoided awarding extreme punishments to students keeping in view of their lives and career and the values and the traditions. Keeping this Aligarh ethos he revived the Students Union, which terrifies you. Give our own students their due, the statutory right of representation, especially when you are in full control and normalcy is restored to the full. Where Naseem Saheb, has failed, as claimed by you? You, Mr. Azis, unfortunately believe in terrorizing the students, intimidating the staff and generating a reign of terror on the campus with the help of Police, Security personnel, CCTV Cameras and what not and have the cheeks to claim you have achieved the normalcy on the campus. YOU ARE SITTING ON A VOLCANO

We are witness to the incident; a teacher was found guilty of moral turpitude and accepted his guilt; Naseem Saheb let him off only to save the teaching fraternity from a stigma. The very same Hon’ble teacher, you having confirmed that he was charged of plagiarizing a book and embezzled Hall money, you have chosen him as your legal adviser. “To err is human and to forgive is divine”, is perhaps the guiding principle for you in this particular case. But why then have you encouraged and harbored people of doubtful integrity and character? A man is known by the company he keeps.

Please recall the day when you were taken in the traditional carriage driven by horses to the office of the Vice Chancellor to take over the charge when Professor Saleemuddin, the then Pro-Vice chancellor (whom you designate as former VC. Why? Because you hold teachers in high esteem and misbehaves with them and victimize them when suits you) was asked by the Students’ Union President to step down from the carriage and he occupied the seat of Prof. Saleemuddin. You, instead of reprimanding the President because of his outrageous behaviour, cultivated him. For this student leader English was a foreign language and Urdu for you. How did you converse with him frequently?

Kindly recall the incident of September 2007, three months after your joining the University. This was culmination of the policy of appeasement of student leaders that you adopted immediately after your arrival. After the unfortunate incident of September 2007, you insisted for an enquiry and the E.C. endorsed your proposal, yet you did not allow the enquiry to be conducted. This points an accusing finger at you and exposes your treacherous ways. Is it because you too are responsible for the said incident due to your above said policies?

Finally you realize it or not, you have committed a suicidal mistake by crossing swords with a person, who stood by his commitments inspite of some of his failures and mistakes, that came his way but you are the one who has no concern and commitment to any one in the world except to your own good-self.

Let the readers decide the darkness of the period.

We, shall receive respect in proportion of the respect, we give to others.

May God help us.

Sincerely,
Prof. Ziauddin Ahmad,
Professor of Botany, Rtd.
__._,_.___

The Darkest Period of AMU?

The V.C., Dr. P.K. Abdul Azis, in his propaganda campaign, called a meeting in the Kennedy Hall on 14.06.2010. For the audience, entire staff of the Registrar’s office was called there. Obviously the work in the Registrar’s office remained suspended during this period. He explained his three years’ achievements. Some of his men delivered speeches in his praises obviously with exaggerations according to our typical culture. Objectionable part of this whole campaign is that he got his ‘Profile’ printed at the cost of the University and distributed among the audience.Still more objectionable is that he wrote in this ‘Profile’ the period of his predecessor as the ‘darkest period’ of the history of Aligarh. Not only this time but he is on record having said on so many occasions that he took over as Vice Chancellor of AMU at a time which, according to him, was the darkest period in the history of AMU. Obviously he is referring to the period when Mr. Naseem Ahmad, IAS, was the Vice Chancellor for almost five years. Since I was also part and parcel of that administration, I have full justification to comment on this irresponsible statement of Dr. Azis Saheb. Till he commented verbally I kept quiet but now when he has come out in writing, my response seems essential. Though I feel it highly embarrassing to discuss this point in public yet Dr. Azis has stooped down so low that I am left with no option but to open my mouth, Hum Bhi Munh Mein Zuban Rakhte Hain – Kash Poochho Ki Mud’daa Kiya Hai.
Making such comments against his predecessor is in a very bad taste, unbecoming of a Vice Chancellor and against propriety. No officer in a sober and cultured society is expected to talk ill of his predecessor. I am sorry to say that he leaves no limits when it comes to vigorous publicizing, rather marketing, of his so called ‘achievements,’ completely forgetting that he is paid for precisely all he has done or undone so far. So where is the need for such an aggressive propaganda and that too at the cost of the university funds? Has any of his predecessors indulged in such an exercise of self–praise? To my knowledge, none.
Because all of them were sober, committed and quiet persons whose only agenda was serving the University in line with the dreams of Sir Syed. They shun all gimmicks of cheap publicity. What is worse about Dr. Azis is that in his over–drive for selling himself, he deliberately denigrates his predecessors to prove that he is the only shining star in the long list of the Vice Chancellors of AMU. I wish there was someone among his so called ‘advisors’ who could advise him that he should not indulge in malicious propaganda against the previous Vice Chancellors.
Here are a few interrogatories for the ‘greatest achiever’, Dr. Azis Saheb:
1. Was the University ever closed sine die during the tenure of Mr. Naseem Ahmad? Not even for a day, compared to two long spells of sine die closures during the tenure of Dr. Azis Saheb. The two murders, which Dr. Azis Saheb has referred to time and again , were committed after Mr. Naseem Ahmad had left the charge. Can Dr. Azis Saheb deny this fact which is in the common knowledge on the campus?
2. Who revived the AMU students’ union after a long gap? The answer is obvious. What about Dr. Azis Saheb?
3. Was there ever any delay in admissions, examinations and declaration of results during the tenure of Mr. Naseem Ahmad? Never
4. Who stopped the practice of arbitrary nominations in admissions and introduced the transparent system of nominations strictly on merit under various categories? On the other hand a very competent lady (Professor Imrana Naseem) was relinquished of her charge as OSD of Girls’ Sch. by Dr. Azis Saheb only because she refused to entertain an arbitrary admission of the recommendee of Mr. Fatmi, the then a Minister.
5. Were there any complaints regarding admissions or conduct of examinations and various entrance tests during Mr. Naseem Ahmad’s tenure? The reply is again in the negative.
6. Who submitted the proposals regarding the up-gradation of J.N Medical College and Z.H College of Engineering and Technology? Who started construction work of the Endocrinology Centre? Who initiated and almost completed the construction work of Dr. Ambedkar Hall for boys and Begum Sultan Jahan Hall for girls? Who started the restoration work of some of the heritage buildings like Victoria Gate wing of S.S Hall, Justice Mahmood’s bungalow (Pili Kothi) and PVC Lodge (It was renovated especially for the purpose of VIP guests and was attached to the Guest House, which has now been allotted to the “extraordinarily competent our illustrious Registrar” by the V.C., who enjoys a luxurious life there)? Who got completed the construction work of the building of Prof. K.A Nizami Centre for Quranic Studies? Who arranged for uninterrupted supply of electricity for the entire AMU campus and got constructed a separate Sub-station for the University? Who got almost all the University roads repaired and re-carpeted? Who ensured introduction of the UGC’s model curricula in almost all the courses? At whose initiative the Govt. of India approved the proposal for establishment of Urdu Academy in not only AMU but two other central universities? Can Dr. Azis deny that these initiatives were taken during the tenure of Mr. Naseem Ahmad?
7. Who raised the banner, though unsuccessfully, for the restoration of minority character of AMU? The reply is again obvious. During the tenure of Dr. Azis Saheb, the University Counsel absented himself on three consecutive hearing dates from Supreme Court without seeking adjournment and Dr. Azis Saheb has failed to take any action against the Counsel, why?
8. Who can deny that four University convocations were held during the tenure of Mr. Naseem Ahmad? Only one convocation could not be held due to the non availability of the VIP who had earlier given the consent to be the Chief Guest for the occasion?
9. Was he not Mr. Naseem Ahmad who raised a banner of successful revolt against the MHRD’s move for common entrance tests for various professional courses?
10. Did Mr. Naseem Ahmad control students’ discipline involving the Police or did he strengthen University’s own discipline system?
11. Lastly were there any allegations of corruption and financial bungling against Mr. Naseem Ahmad or against any of the other Vice Chancellor’s who preceded Dr. Abdul Azis? Let Dr. Azis Saheb himself reply.
The Real Darkest Periods of AMU:
1. One of the darkest periods in the history of Aligarh was when the AMU Act was repealed in 1965 by an Ordinance and Government wanted to drop the word ‘Muslim’ from AMU and nationalize it on the pattern of the Osmania University, Hyderabad i.e. the Minority Character was in danger .
2. Another darkest period of the University is now when, i) the Visitor of the University, for the first time in history, has ordered an enquiry against the present Vice Chancellor, Dr. Abdul Azis for his alleged involvement in financial corruptions and when, ii) the Residential Character of the University is put to danger in the name of the so called Special Centers.
My sincere advice to Dr. P.K Abdul Azis is that it is still time for him to do mid-course correction in his self centered and autocratic style of functioning. He should come out clean of the serious charges of corruption against him. He should try to learn the knack of taking people along with him and should stop throwing mud at others.
I am extremely constrained to write these comments and making it public.
Waqif Hain Mukhalif Bhi Mizajon Se Hamare – Humlog Dua Dete Hain Gali Nahin Dete
I hope Dr. P.K Abdul Azis Saheb is listening.
Regretfully,
Dr. Nafees Ahmad,
Professor of Ophthalmic Biochem, Rtd.
G-2, Dream Homes, S.S. Nagar, Aligarh

Beyond Rafi Relief:Moral Ambiguities of AMU

Big educational and cultural institutions, sports organizations, etc. are increasingly earning disrepute for mis-utilising/ (diverting illegally) funds. In fact, there seems to be a competitive spirit in this kind of degeneration. The allegations are most often against the best of scholars, and most suave of the politicians. P. Vijayan, Shahshi Tharoor, NMML Director (See, The Hindu, 24 May 2010), quite a few Vice Chancellors, and God knows who else.
O. Ravi (IAS), Lalit Modi and other such names are not as much outrageous, because of their "low" stature.
Dr Mohsin Raza sb, Mr Adil or few more people like them may (or may not) come out with embarrassing truths. That won't be surprising. Still some highly accomplished alumni (self-righteous ones, some of them based in overseas) will display most disgusting kind of flattery. Even if Dr Mohsin Raza sb or Mr Adil come to know of irregularities and succeed in obtaining evidences to that effect, what difference will it make? How many self-righteous, overseas alumni have shown their outrage against Principal Accountant General's Report (November 2009) on huge financial irregularities in AMU? How many of them have spoken forthrightly against Justice Mathew Report? There is a long history of corruption in AMU. One of the reasons for saddening and depressing last days of Sir Syed was corruption in MAO College. Many more evidences collected in various inquiry reports like Sheikh Abdullah Report(1926), Ibrahim Rahimatoola Report (1927), G.C. Chatterji Report (1961),...further testify it.
So much of Tehzeeb and Tamaddun of Aligarh.
Reports of corruption in higher judiciary are no secret. Arundhati Roy's essay, "Scandal in the Palace" is only one such brave "report". Dinakaran and many more are already increasingly becoming sources of embarrassment for the Indian judiciary.
We are living in an age of moral ambiguities. The distinction between heroes and villains, honest and dishonest, moral and immoral are increasingly getting blurred. Popular Bollywood Hindi movies are best articulations/ representations of such ambiguities.
The whistle blowers are the most hated elements among the sections of Aligs. They would ask you to leave the sacred/ holy place like AMU, as according to them, it is above criticism; it is a question of faith (Aqeeda/ Aastha- Much like the Sangh Pariwar’s argument that the Ramjanma Bhoomi is a matter of their aastha hence Supreme Court, Parliament, Constitution, scientific history, all are irrelevant and redundant). They wantonly refuse to realize that those who make such exposes are the greater friends/ well-wishers of AMU, as they are mobilizing opinion for the systemic corrective.
Shahryar’s poem, “Muslim University ki Fariyaad” is worth recalling:

MujaawiroN ki bheerh ney
Mujhey phir ek qabr mein badal diya
MaiN kah raha hooN der sey
MaiN zinda hooN
Meri sada mein baaz gasht kyoN nahiN
Merey Khuda
Mujhey sazaaeiN jitni dey
Pe yooN nahiN


Beware of these “Mujaawirs”.
There are many, ever increasing, and they are the moral custodians of the institution.
Should not we scratch the various layers of meanings embedded in this brilliant metaphor, “Mujaawir”?

I hope, "amunetwork" won't censor it.

Regards,
Dr Mohammad Sajjad
Lecturer
Centre of Advanced Study in History
Aligarh Muslim University (India)
fdr_amu@yahoogroups.com

Rafi Relief Society, AMUSU, Student Activism and Current Administration

Janab Dr. Mohsin Raza Sahab, Moderator of WorldofAligs and Former President, Aligarh Muslim University Students Union rightly mentioned about the Philanthropic Rafi Relief Society associated with AMUSU. This is also a glaring truth pointed by him that University authorities are still charging the students some amount under this head ( Code 50206 in the PAYEE's COPY) even in the absence of AMU Students Union.

In one of the RTI reply received by me vide D.No 134/Stud dated 07.10.2009 from the Asst Finance Officer( Students) it was mentioned that AMU authorities collected Rs. 64,153 in the session 2006-07, Rs. 83,466 in the session 2007-08 and Rs. 69, 568 in 2008-09 as Rafi Relief Fund.

Well, I am not aware of the rules and regulation at place that whether Rafi Relief fund can be spent in the absence of AMU Students Union or not but in another RTI reply vide D.No 141/Stud dated 10.10.2009 it was stated that in the session 2007-08 Rs. 49, 213 was spent by the AMU authorities. However AMUSU was dissolved in September, 2007 by the AMU authorities. Janab Mohsin Raza Sahab may throw light on this issue as being Former AMUSU President he might know that whether AMU authorities can spend from this fund or not in the absence of AMUSU.

AMU students are always ahead in the philanthropic activities and as I often compare it with other universities I feel proud about my alma mater on this front. AMUSU has always taken the lead in recognizing the problems and issues of the distress lot of the society and to come up with any measure which can help them. The presence of Students Union bolsters such activities as then such activity becomes more organized and more students participate in bringing a major change. Even the worst Students Unions has shown great contribution in the philanthropic activities.

During my stay at AMU I remember the AMUSU's role in the Tsunami relief work going on in Tamilnadu for which I felt really proud. They sent a relief team consisting of 11 doctors to the Tsunami ravaged areas of Nagapattinam where they distributed medicines and organized health camps. They also contributed Rs.2, 32, 480 in the PM's relief fund which was highly appreciated. AMUSU also created a "Benevolent Fund" during that time so that subsidy can be provided to the poor students in meeting the expenditure of toward treatment of disease/traumas for which the requisite facilities are not available at JNMC and they are referred to other reputed hospitals for specialized treatment outside Aligarh. The fact is that a process of sensitization about such issues affecting our society was a commonplace during that time.

But what actually make me highly disappointed and angry about the current administration of AMU that systematically they are creating such environment here that students are becoming naive and nonchalant about the issues and problems inflicting in our society.

However students of AMU are still more helpful than others but in the absence of any organization and systematic crushing of any leadership (Our Vice-Chancellor often say at the functions he doesn't want any leader here) I think we are creating a dead society here where individuals are trained to be concerned about themselves only. We know this way we cant think of helping the beleaguered Muslim Community.

Md. Adil Hossain <adilhossain43(AT)yahoo.in>

M.A(Previous) Mass Communication

AMU, Aligarh

Courtest: TheAligarhForum@yahoogroups.com

AMU Visitor’s Inquiry resumed against Prof. Azis

AMU Visitor’s Inquiry resumed against Prof. Azis But the hon’ble Prof. Azis maintains, ‘the allegations of corruption are a myth’. How uncharitable on the part of the apparently friendly MHRD to order the Inquiry and defame the noble soul. The new Inquiry committee to go into the allegations against Prof. Abdul Azis the Vice-Chancellor is headed by Justice B.A. Khan and Justice Akbar Baroocha is required to submit the report by May end. At its first meeting held on 05.04.2010 at Delhi (not Aligarh) it made clear that the Inquiry is against the hon’ble Prof. Azis and not the University and party to the Inquiry are people who are against the VC and those who are supporting the VC and signatories (all teachers) of the so-called counter allegations. Thus the confusion which was all along deliberately created by Prof. Azis to hoodwink the masses, is removed Consequently, Shri Ejaz Maghbool who has been appointed as University Counsel at a whooping fee of about Rs. 90000/- per hearing was asked by the Committee not to appear as there are no allegations against the University. Prof. Azis has been asked to appear on 10th May to plead his case or send a lawyer for the purpose. The earlier Inquiry committee headed by Justice Fakhruddin was more friendly, liberal and democratic in its approach. At the very outset, it invited all the members of the Court, EC and AC (a total of over 200) and sought their approval to continue the Inquiry and even invited complaints, if any. How sweet and considerate of it. It was in a way free for all and would have taken a life time to complete the Inquiry. Fortunately, difference cropped up between the Chairman and the member forcing the member to resign. The Chairman followed suit and resigned and the Committee had to be disbanded. It was in Oct, 2009 but the Ministry who is soft towards the extremely cooperative Prof. Azis, dragged it feet and took four long months to re-constitute the Committee. From the way the new committee endeared itself we may hope that report would appear within the two months of the specified time. Does it not lie in the domain of the Inquiry Committee to demand the removal of Prof. Azis from office during the pendency of the Inquiry so that fair and unhindered inquiry could be conducted as is the rule elsewhere in the country? The position taken by Shri Kapil Sibal that the AMU Act does provide for removal of VC is too simplistic and deliberate and intended to assist the most non-co-operative Prof. Azis. Shall no one be punished for a murder, as the AMU Act does not provide for it in so many words? Prof. Ziauddin Ahmad (Retd,) Department of Botany Aligarh Muslim University Aligarh