AMU: Visitor Looking The Other Way Or Is The Silence Meaningful?

AMU: Visitor Looking The Other Way Or Is The Silence Meaningful?

Apparently large amount of complaints and institution of CBI, CAG and CVC probes by the Visitor and the fag end of the tenure of the VC, Abdul Azis (retiring in Jan, 2012) forced the Visitors to issue directives (advisory) dated 10.8.11 to restrain the VC *………………restrained from making appointments ………….. as also form taking any policy decision which may have long term financial or other implications on the executive and academic functioning of the ‘University*

But the VC who has been violating rules at will with impunity (asserted in meetings ‘I am the law’ and at the same time vehemently denied publicly that he has not violated any rules). Would he as habitual defaulter, have any hesitation in defying the directives of the Visitors?

1. Irresistible VC, making all out attempts to prompt and instigate the Muslims residents of Kishanganj Malegoan and Aurangabad rather playing a Muslim card to provide land free of cost to the University for the establishment of the so-called (illegal and anti-University) Centres.

Moreover no funds have been sanctioned for Kishanganj or Malegoan or Aurangabad and the funds required should be of the order of about 400 crores for each Centre as proposed by Fatimi Committee of the MHRD. The fate of Murshidabad and Malappuram Centres is too well known because of the acute shortage of funds.

Furthermore, the University has not approved Centres at Malegoan and Aurangabad nor did it authorize the VC for the purpose nor is the VC so empowered. However, the recklessness of the VC is abound and the Govt. which cannot plead ignorance of the traits of the VC, was expected to keep a close watch to contain the VC, failed tamely.

Not only this he has dared a delegation, of five senior teachers to Aurangabad etc on 25^th Oct 2011 by air despite the ban imposed on financial expenditures by the MHRD (18.8.11)

2. Proposed taking over of the Union Sec. School, a private School, by the University.

3. Proposed introduction of new admission system for admission to Medical faculty

4. Expenditures are being incurred on air-travels, visits, conferences, celebrations and entertainments, in lakhs of rupees without exercising any restrain as desired by MHRD (18.8.11)

All these issues fall under policy matters with far-reaching financial and administrative and academic implications and the imposed financial crunch, are therefore, in abundant defiance of the Visitors/MHRD directives.

Shri Kapil Sibal was very much expected (4.11.2011) to sound the Bihar Govt. on .seeking clarification on the establishment of Centre at Kishanganj, that the Visitor’s directive does not permit such a policy decision. Instead, perhaps in his ignorance or otherwise, referred the writ pending in the High Court, as the reason for restraining to proceed in the matter.

Obviously, after having issued the directives it was incumbent on the Govt. to remain watchful and take all appropriate actions to insure the observance of the directives issued

But the Govt. has clearly faltered and failed to contain the unstoppable VC, Is it really a failure due to connivance or the Govt. has other ideas and waiting for the CBI report which is due any day, Justice, however, demanded that the Govt. should have acted now to stop the VC from such misadventures and the liberties enjoyed by the besieged VC in every day functioning reflects upon the Govt. credibility.

Important: So-called AMU Centres are misconceived, out rightly illegal, anti-University and shall not stand a chance in the Court of Law (two PIL pending in the Court)!

The report of the CBI probe is expected any day! Actually it was due in Oct. itself per schedule!

Waese loot machi hai ! Ek-ek din bhari hai

Prof. Ziauddin Ahmad (Retd.)
Dept of Botany
Aligarh Muslim University
Aligarh

He can be reached at

ziauddinahmad.(AT).yahoo.co.in

Hidden Agenda of Congress Party in Destroying AMU's Residential Character?

Subject: AMU centres...No one answers the questions just going on invasively....

Dear All

ASAK,

Some of the alumni have a legitimate concern about the direction, our debate both for and against the centers is taking; personal comments and biases have also come to the fore and it is but natural that some of us are perturbed over that. However, just being a good human doesn't make one immune from personal and other influences and sometimes they do affect initiatives as well as responses.

Some points of information first:--

* Till date no post i.e. teaching as well as non teaching has been sanctioned for the centers. All posts on which appointments have been made have been illegally transferred from the Campus, by depriving and starving the Departments here at Aligarh.

* Crores of rupees recieved from different funding agencies has been siphoned off for the Centers. For example, the Ministry of Health, GOI, specially sanctioned approx Rs. One Crore to purchase critical care equipment such as Ventilators at the JNMC Hospital, this has been diverted to build boundary walls at Mallapuram/Murshidabad, meanwhile persons continue to die at Aligarh.

* The University has been generally refusing travel grant to attend conferences from May this financial year, despite the VC's proclamations to the contrary, however about Rs Three lacs were spent on TA/DA for appointment of guest faculty at these Centers. A little more was spent on the visit to Maharashtra. Where did this money come from? No special grant has been given for these inspection tours by the UGC/ MHRD.It is the AMU that you know that is bearing this burden from its normal grant.

I would liike to give a point by point response to the questions being asked in this thread, but some of the points were already answered a few months back by some of us, as a first step therefore, I am again posting a few lines sent earlier (in May 2010) with the commitment that I hope to present a really brief response in a day or two

"... many ...persons at AMU and outside feel, 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 sincerity 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.

3.1The 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.

4.1How 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, lose 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.

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 not, 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

Hony. Secretary, AMU Teachers’ Association, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh

Email: s_mustafa_zaidi(AT)yahoo.co.in

Student 1968-1974, Teacher 1978- till date, Teachers' Representative 1982

Former Member University Court, Former Member Academic Council,

Former Member Examination Committee and member of many Committees set up by the Executive Council, Academic Council and the University administration on different issues.

(Message Posted on "worldofaligs" AMU Alumni Network Yahoo Groups on Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 14:49:34 +0530)

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

Bihar (Kishanganj) AMU Centre Scam: FIR Lodged Against Cong MP, Five MLAs

AMU - FIR Lodged Against Cong MP, Five MLAs:

What were the pressing circumstances before Maulana Asrarul Haq Quasmi (M.P) and others to come out on road and resort to violence and disrupt law and order, thereby inviting criminal proceedings by the District Administration?

What prompted them is the disclosure made by the scheming and manipulator VC, Prof. Azis, made at Kishanganj on 6 Sept 2011 despite the Visitors gag order;

“According to AMU VC, he is going to retire in January 2012, so all the official formalities to open the ‘Centre’ at Kishanganj should be finished before he leaves the University. In fact, he has some concern and said it can’t be expected that the next VC would take ahead the idea of opening the ‘Study Centres of AMU’ out of Aligarh”

While all other reasons put forward to justifying their misadventure were misleading and not convincing because;
The AMU Act does not provide for creation of ‘Centres’. Moreover, the AMU being a Residential and Muslim Minority Institution [Section 5(9A) & Preamble]; no facility for teaching beyond 25 Km can be created.
The AMU cannot extend concessions to Muslims, so is true for the AMU Centres under total AMU control, as the Minority status of AMU has been quashed by High Court in 2005.
It is practically impossible to effectively manage affairs of AMU Centres, situated thousands of Kms away, on day to day basis from Aligarh.
Establishment of AMU Centres/Campuses is in the UPA Govt agenda since long. In the recent past it was during the tenure of Mr. Naseem Ahmad, 2004-2005, who refused to oblige the MHRD as the AMU Act does not provide for Centres/Campuses especially beyond 25 Kms away from the Univ Mosque.
Prof. Azis broke all records of manipulation and violations of rules in the process of establishing the Centres at Murshidabad (Pranab’s constituency) and Malappuram (VC town) and incurred expenses in crores of Rupees illegally and unauthorized.
On the top of it all, the amendments to the Statutes proposed through manipulations and illegalities, have neither been approved by the competent two Houses of Parliament nor Gazetted as required under Section 31 (4) and (5) of the AMU Act. Thus the two Centres do not legally exist. This is an illegality, which has no parallel. As a result this caused two PILS to be filed, pending before High Court.
The UPA Govt through the MHRD, Finance Ministry and UGC provided all strategic support and encouragement to the unscrupulous and corrupt VC including whole lot of manipulations and illegalities (violations of rules) committed in the process.
The Govt has neither made any grant for Kishanganj nor is there permission of the Visitor available for that.

The Finance Minister has gone to the extent of misleading the Parliament when the allocation of Rs 50 crore was made for Murshidabad and Malappuram in the Union Budget 2009-2010 on the plea that the AMU has decided to establish two new AMU Campuses, which was totally incorrect. In another manipulation only Rs.10 crore were released to Mallappuram out of 25 crores allocated.

The quantum of illegalities committed are unprecedented, brazen and assume the size of a full fledged scam with the blessings of the Govt, which swears for clean public service devoid of corruption.

It is more than evident that the Congress MP has been promoting the party’s and his own interests without any regard to the harm that could be caused to AMU and inspirations of Muslims of India.

Maulana Quasmi and his supporters just cannot plead ignorance and deserve to be condemned and rejected for misleading Muslims and AMU.

Er. Shabbir Ahmad
Er. Saeedur Rehman Siddiqi
Er. Z.A. Qidwai
Prof. Q. Zainus Sajidin
Prof. Nafees Ahmad
Prof. Ziauddin Ahmad

AMU VC Azis Decries Orders of the Honble President of India, Visitor of AMU!

AMU Affairs: Ref: AMU’s VC Decries Presidential Order, CBI Team in Campus by Faisal Fareed (daijiworld.com dated 18.9.11): Besieged VC loses Balance.

Evidently, the presence of CBI team on the Campus and ‘quizzing of the VC twice’, has its telling effect on the behavior of the besieged VC, which has un-nerved him to resort to the most un-becoming and objectionable outbursts against AMUTA (holds were never otherwise barred for him) as reported and quoted below;

“AMUTA representatives and their collaborators are collaborating with the anti-education, anti-Muslims anti-AMU forces working in the government and outside”. The Govt. is supposed to take immediate notice on this provocation and unjustified comment of the VC and restrain the VC decisively. At the same time AMUTA should warn the VC to behave!

“the restriction is totally illegal, AMUTA leaders are apparently behaving like puppets of certain politicians and the MHRD. The stand taken by them is violative of the AMU Act”.

“blatant lies were constantly fed by AMUTA, Executive without the required mandate of AMU larger teaching community”.

VC failed to elaborate on the illegality of the Visitor’s order nor did he register his protest with the Visitor against illegalities (except the clarification sought on routine matters and making payments for the on-going projects which was allowed. Request for making temporary appointments is under consideration). He has also failed to knock the doors of the Court for justice?? The chivalrous way, the VC operates, has thrown the rules to winds, he ought to ignore the illegal Visitor’s order. The VC, who has unique distinction of holding the meetings of EC without quorum and took very vital decisions, should not be deterred by ‘illegal directives’ and resort to functioning as before. What is the hesitation now? Azis sb has been the law unto himself !

So far as the functioning of AMUTA is concerned: The AMUTA Executive and Action Committee had the mandate of the G.B. VC tried his best to make a dent through the beneficiaries, teachers in the Administration and those waiting for favours, has failed tamely and the attempt to engineer a mini revolt against AMUTA fell flat. If the VC is so sure of dissent amongst teachers, why does he not direct them to requisition a G.B. meeting to thrash the matter out (an attempt, already made, in this direction has failed). Further more, if the AMUTA is feeding blatant lies, why can’t the VC and his propaganda machinery, the Media Committee, who are constantly on the watch and move, failed to effectively counter the AMUTA and expose them? Actually, the facts are contrary, the VC has nothing to say in self-defense except telling lies, twisting facts, presenting half truths, for which there are no takers now, as the public is fed up with his false propaganda. The ship is sinking and the writing on the walls.

AMU Centres: VC continues to defy the Visitor’s ‘restrain’ order by involving himself in the exercise to establish AMU Centres at Malappuram, Kishangang as reported ‘two circle’.net and by us (18.9.11) and now Malegaon Centre (refer: ummid.com by staff reported (18.9.11) and the VC has agreed and promised to send a team for the inspection of the land etc.

In the process the VC has dealt with: the short-comings at Malappuram and the financial and other support of the Kerala State Govt and Shri E. Ahmad, who has no Locus standi; VC has given word for the establishment of a Centre at Kishangang from the scratch and sounded the Bihari enthusiasts to hurry up or they would be doomed as the next VC may not oblige them (VC does not make policies but he had manipulated and coerced); and the negotiations for the Malegoan Centre have started that too by by-passing the University Authorities AC, EC and the Court (as the powers do not lie with the VC) and at the same time defying the Visitor’s restrain order as the policy matters of far reaching consequences are abundantly involved.

Thus openly defying the directions contained in the Visitor’s ‘restrain’ order of not indulging in appointments and decisions which may have long time financial and administrative and academic implications.

Therefore, there is a fool-proof case against the un-stoppable and erring VC, Abdul Azis for drastic action by placing him under suspension immediately to put an end to the nonsense.

In addition to this, the indulgence of the VC in opposing and meddling with the CBI probe in various ways should also be considered seriously.
Failure of the Govt. if any, to proceed even now decisively against Azis on the merit of the case, shall send a wrong signal and disappoint rather annoy the Community, which would have far-reaching consequences.

UPA by causing delays and its repeated failure to rise to the occasion advertently or otherwise, has already alienated Muslims at large.

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

AMU: Four years of Azis: Complete failure. I-Academics.

Most tragic period in the history but Azis claimed his performance satisfactory. How can he sit on judgment for his own doings?

Let us, therefore, have a look at the academics first as the financial and administrative matters have secondary importance in a University;

Session 2010 – 2011: A Sample Survey:
1. No admissions are made in Ph. D. courses in most of the Faculties but the VC claimed third position amongst Central University, is false and totally baseless. The VC is requested to provide a proof.
2. Mandatory 180 days (for years length courses BA and SSSC) and 90 days (for Masters degree) of actual teaching not achieved and exams held on time, a fraud.
Naturally, the courses, were not completed and no questions are asked from the untaught courses, nobody bothers about it like the past.
3. VC managed the award of a Ph. D. degree (in law) to one of his political supporter in 2010, who got himself registered in 1992 and had not completed his mandatory stay of two years at Aligarh and his admission had lapsed after five years in 1997 it self, which could not be revived as per rules yet the degree was awarded.
4 Requirement of 75% attendance has been reduced to 30% illegally; devalued degrees and adversely affected prospects in the job market, to accommodate 200 odd and under pressure from pampered Students Union and self styled leaders.
5. Promoted copying in examinations by shielding the wrong-doers through the most unexpected direct intervention of the Students Union leaders and others, never witness before. No action followed to stop this against the pampered and encouraged students used to terrorize the campus.
6. Supplementary exam in B.D.S (Bachelor of Dental Surgery) a prestigious course, introduced by the VC who has no authority, to appease rowdies, which threatened de-recognition of degree.
7. Copying has been alleged at various illegally established Entrance Test Centres out sideAligarh.
8. Money changed hands in a big way in admissions in LLB and MBA at the two AMU Centres as alleged. CBI probe shall reveal it all.
9. At the two blessed AMU Centres at Murshidabad (constituency of Pronab Mukerjee) and Malappuram, the classes (though totally illegally) commenced from 1st March, 2011 and the session is to terminate in July while the session of AMU commenced from Aug.2010 – May 2011. (information supplied under RTI)
As such, the AMU Centres shall hold exams after just four months as against nine months at A.M.U.
10. On top of it all, at the AMU Centres summer vacations have now been announced from 22ndJune to 15th July (Press report on 26.6.11) (V.C. accorded approval who has no authority as rules do not exist.

Board of Studies of Management declined to appoint examiners without which examiners cannot be appointed.
11. The so called AMU Centres are; totally misconceived illegal un-authorized and anti-University and it is totally misleading to claim that concessions could be extended to Muslims. The things are highly manipulative, unprecedented politically motivated under pressure from Congress to mislead Muslims for electoral gains. It is a fraud and assumes the size of a scam. (the silence of Muslims as a whole is most disgusting, alarming and suicidal). The proposed amendments of the Statutes have not been passed by the Parliament. As such, the Centres are patently illegal.
12. The Faculty of Science where lights used to remain ‘on’ throughout the nights is thrown into frightening darkness as soon as the sun sets in as also it looks deserted in the afternoons.

The Departments of Studies are starving for funds, and laboratories are in acute shortage of sophisticated equipments, books etc.

In the 5th plan, out of the 1300 crores requisitioned merely 100 crores were promised by the ‘friendly Govt.’ to the ‘loyal VC’ despite his dreams and tall claims of achieving international standards.

These facts do not only refute the tall claims and nail the lies & exaggerations of the VC but also they point clearly that the VC has neither the will not the ability to administer the affairs of the University effectively and sincerely.
Write-up on financial and administrative aspects shall follow.

Prof. Ziauddin Ahmad,
Dept of Botany, AMU, Aligarh
Email: ziauddinahmad@yahoo.co.in

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

AMU Special Centres, Dr. Azis & Sir Shah Sulaiman

From: Nafees Ahmad
Date: Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 4:48 PM
Subject: AMU Special Centres, Dr. Azis & Sir Shah Sulaiman
To: alirizvi@aol.com


Mohtaram Ali Rizvi Saheb, ASAK,

I am sorry to reply to your mail a bit late as you raised several points which required some time. In a detailed telephonic conversation on the other day I think, after going through your mail, I could not make my points clear.

You said in this mail, “I just fail to understand how you (I) feel that the opening of the AMU Centres will adversely affect AMU”. I submit:
1. The University has expanded several fold compared to what it was fifty-sixty years ago but no major changes in its administrative system have been brought about so far, which has caused an overall deterioration both in academics and discipline. It will cause still more deterioration if it is expanded further without bringing necessary changes in its administrative system especially after creation of the said Special Centres. If the administration, at the helm of affairs, cannot handle the affairs at the mother university, how can it be expected to handle when more institutions are created thousands Km away. The V.C. would neither properly manage AMU nor the Centres. Standards of both are, therefore, bound to go down further. Though the Centres have not come into existence yet, the V.C. is not finding time for the University only because he is much more worried about the “Qaum” and busy in establishing these Centres. Files over files are piled up waiting for his action as I could gather from the offices. Condition of various Departments, Schools and Colleges is getting from bad to worse for delay in action.
2. The affection the Aligs have among themselves is a rare and unique quality, not found among those of other Institutions. Its main cause is the residential life they enjoy at Aligarh, an obvious outcome of the Residential Character of AMU. They eat together; they live together; they quarrel and compromise, all together. “Is Buzm Mein Taighain Khenchi Hain Is Buzm Mein Saghar Tore Hain – Is Buzm Mein Ankh Bichai Hai Is Buzm Mein Dil Tak Jore Hain”. I have witnessed so many Mahabharats followed by Bharat Milaps among AMU students in the past. The so called satellite campuses will develop their own culture that will be all together different from AMU. In Kerala you will find Keralite culture, eating Rasam, Idli and Sanber etc and in Bengal another culture. Yes, you may get a few good lawyers or management students (That too is not sure in the light of above mentioned administrative difficulties) but Aligarianism will surely become a “Qissa-e-Parina”.
3. You say, “Let us get the money, the land, help set up the campuses…., assist in their becoming centres of excellence”. No doubt this expresses your pious enthusiasm and very good sentiments. But may be good for a talk of idealism and for an effective sermon on Muslim educational uplift. But when it will come to giving practical shape for creating a Centre of Excellence one will find it too difficult, rather impossible to run the AMU and thousands mile away Centres together. You say, “Like you and many others, I do share the fear that the Governance of these Centres may be difficult, but not impossible”. In the light of the little administrative experience that I have, I reiterate that the governance of institutions situated so far away shall be rather impossible. In the words of Mr. S. Shahabuddin, “I personally see the impossibility of the AMU running Satellite Universities, even if, it becomes constitutionally & legally competent to do so. Given the record of the AMU, this will be an impossible task from a purely administrative and management point of view”.
4. You say, “Sir Syed did not visualize AMU as a physical campus at Aligarh itself. If his vision was to educate the Indian minorities and Muslims, then surely we are on the right path”. Sir Syed not only visualized but also he practically established the MAO College at Aligarh. He wished it to grow into a University of repute, to the status of and to be known as the Oxford and Cambridge of the east. This was his dream project, which he visualized only for Aligarh. Yes, Sir Syed, Syed Mahmood and his other colleagues also desired to propagate modern education all over India and, for the purpose, founded Muslim Educational Conference in order to establish such schools and colleges in the length and breath of the country, popularly known as Aligarh Movement. As a result, Shibli National College, Azamgarh, Gandhi Faiz-e-Aam College, Shahejahanpur and few other institutions came into existence due to this movement but under independent management. Nothing can be so contrary to the facts, rather absurd, than to say that they wanted to establish schools of modern education all over India under the management of MAO College or AMU and that this is the right path of Sir Syed. Sir Syed emphasized especially on Tarbiat of his students, for which he established the well known “English House” in order to train them in good manners, culture, etiquettes and English way of life. Slowly this responsibility was shifted to the wardens and the Seniors of the Halls of residence. I still remember that at the time of my “Introduction”, when I joined AMU as a student, one of the Seniors asked me, “Have you seen Bab-e-Ilm (a small door in between SM North and its Dinning Hall opening towards the Union Hall, that time it was between the Depts. of Persian and Law )”; I responded with Yes. He said; Sir Syed constructed Victoria Gate, Bab-e-Ishaq, Babe-Rahmat, Lawrence Gate and Zahoor Gate (all in S.S. Hall), all of these being much bigger in size than Bab-e-Ilm (Gate of knowledge); What message it gives? Then he himself replied, in a big laughter; that means you read less (the bookish knowledge) and learn more (I was known as mugging the books most of the time). It was, therefore, Tarbiat of students that, to Sir Syed, was most important.
5. You say, “If people feel that the AMU Act does not have the provision for creation of these centres in far flung areas, let us then involve and get the Act amended”.Yes, the Act needs so many amendments but, I am sorry, any amendment for the sake of these centres, which amounts to abolishing our Residential Character shall not at all be acceptable and we (the Aligarh fraternity as a whole) shall be the first to oppose this move tooth and nail. Till we are alive we shall not let the Residential Character destroyed and the University go down under in the name of the so called Mallappuram and Murshidabsad Centres for a few crores of Rupees. This is an ill conceived programme and one of the great mistakes of Dr. Azis from the very beginning. Now he is adamant to get it through by hook or by crook.
6. You say, “In our desire to discredit a person or a group, we are trying to kill such a great initiative”. Our intentions may not kindly be doubted. Opposition of the Centres is not for the sake of discrediting any individual. We are opposing the Centres with full sincerity and conviction. As far as discrediting Dr. Azis is concerned, he himself is responsible for that. The charges of financial bungling both at CUSAT, Kochi and AMU have reportedly been proved. Still he has not decided to mend his ways and probably he shall not. Can any body tell me why he has engaged CPWD for the University constructions involving crores of Rupees when there is a full fledged in house Building Department for the purpose. Is it because they reportedly pay “commission” very quietly and are known to have institutionalized it? Only God knows. He engaged CPWD in Kochi also. The same experiment he is successfully repeating in Aligarh. ‘Honesty should not only be practiced but also it should appear to have been practiced’. Every body knows but can do nothing. Tuk Tuk Deedum- Dum na Kashidum”. A Maulana, while explaining the ‘Shirk’ in a lecture said; if you add a drop of urine to a bucket full of milk, it will make the whole milk impure. Barring Murarji Desai as it might be an Amrit for him, it is Haram for Muslims. Likewise, we the Aligarh fraternity, cannot tolerate for a second to find the Head of this great seat of learning involved in corruption. Had he been noble, he would have quit this august office on his own after the above reports. What face has he, now, to talk about Muslim educational uplift or Special Centres, again where crores of Rupees are involved. How such a person can be relied upon?

This reminds me of Sir Shah Sulaiman. He was Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court and then moved to Federal Court (the Supreme Court) as also the Vice-Chancellor of AMU. He came on the week ends to Aligarh and worked for two days (Saturday and Sunday). Usually he used to come directly to the VC office from the Railway station. V.C. office was housed in a room, adjacent to Victoria Gate on the west wing of the upper floor. He himself used to put on lights of his office and worked for the whole day till late in night. Thereafter, some times he went to the Phoos Ka Bangla (The V.C. Lodge, which was a thatched cottage that time and was known as Phoos Ka Bangla) in the night but most often he used to sleep on the roof of S.S. Hall (west) itself in front of his office. He took his food from the S.S. Hall Dining Hall (Lunch and dinner both). The bearer of Sir Shah Sulaiman, who made his bed on the roof and served food to him, narrated this story to me whom I happened to see as he was alive when I was a student. When leaving for Allahabad or Delhi on the night of Sundays he religiously put off the lights. Dr. Azis Saheb must not feel happy that he is following the footsteps of Sir Shah Sulaiman as he took his food from the S.S. Hall Dining Hall and Dr. Azis is eating from the University Guest House because at the end of every month Sir Sulaiman paid for his food to S.S. Hall and electricity charges of his office. He worked honorary and did not charge salary from the University.
Bhai Ali Rizvi Saheb, now tell me where our Hon'ble V.C. finds himself fit in the galaxy of the Vice Chancellors like Sir Ross Masood, Sir Ziauddin, Sir Shah Sulaiman, Dr. Zakir Husain, Col. B.H. Zaidi, Mr. Tayyabji, Prof. Khusroo, Mr. S. Hamid, Mr. Hamid Ansari and lately Mr. Naseem Ahmad etc. What is his level? He has discredited himself by his own deeds. No body is responsible for that. Has he courage to compare his way of living like Nawabs with wasteful expenditures at the cost of the University with that of the most simple life of Sir Shah Sulaiman. Though there was the title 'Shah' in his name but he lived like a Gada. Sir Sulaiman and others are, and shall ever be known for their sacrifices they made for this great seat of learning and Dr. Azis shall be known for …..?

Wassalam, regards,

Nafees Ahmad,
Ph.D. (1968),
Professor of Ophthalmic Biochem. Rtd,
G-2, Dream Homes, S.S. Nagar, Aligarh.
Ph: 9319096230