|
|
Then, there
are some employees who were getting the university contracts and
earning crores of rupees in the process. This is the most powerful
group whom no VC dare to ignore, and if he does, he shall face all
sorts of opposition and this group, in tandem with other vested
interests, will try to create a situation where it will be almost
well nigh impossible for the new VC to work in peace. These groups
have their representatives in the Executive Council (EC), Academic
Council (AC) and the Court which is the supreme governing body of
the AMU. This group is equipped with both money and muscle. They
can easily get a murder or other crime committed at the campus.
In 2007, two
murders took place on the campus. Students went on rampage and
accompanied by some outside anti-social elements, they barged into
the VC lodge, looted the VC’s personal laptop and other valuables,
smashed his TV set and other articles and then put the lodge on
fire. The photos of the burnt VC lodge were published in local
papers at the time. The VC, Prof. PK Abdul Azis, was whisked away
before the mob descended and thus his life was saved. He is paying
for his radical decisions like giving the building construction
work to the CPWD, to provide the AMU with a security system so
that no crime takes place and if one takes place, the culprit is
apprehended on the spot, giving the control of the University high
schools in the hands of the Registrar and diluting the power of
the inactive managers of these schools, making the Purchase
Committee more democratic and transparent, opening four
examination centres elsewhere in India, trying to secure IIT
status for the Zakir Hussain College of Engg & Technology and
turning the JN Medical College and Hospital into a highly
developed state of the art super speciality research centre at par
with Delhi’s AIIMS. Your browser may not support display of this
image.
These are the
groups which did not attend the EC meeting, stopped others from
attending the same, shouted and created nuisance outside the
meeting hall, and when the VC in his capacity as the Chairman took
up the agenda in the adjourned second meeting as per rules, they
complained to the Visitor (President of India) through the Union
HRD ministry that the said meeting was illegal due to lack of
quorum.
The present
crisis
Some vested
groups, as indicated above, which maintain a parasitic presence on
the AMU campus, complained to the Visitor through the Union
Ministry of HRD (during the tenure of Arjun Singh) levelling forty
charges.
The Visitor
served a notice dated 20 April 2009 addressed to the Registrar u/s
13 of the AMU Act, 1920. The university was ordered to file its
reply on or before 5 May 2009. Its request for more time to
collect informations from various departments of the university
was turned down by the HRD Ministry. From this, it can be fathomed
how much influence the vested group enjoy in the HRD Ministry. It
is strange to note that all the allegations are levelled against
the person of the VC, Prof. PK Abdul Azis, but the HRD Ministry
directed the university to file its reply within 15 days, after
getting the same approved by the EC. Thus, the reply filed by the
university to the show cause notice of the Visitor was passed and
approved in a meeting of the EC held on 3 May 2009. The reply was,
with much effort, filed before the deadline. One can see the haste
of the HRD Ministry that gave only 15 days to the VC to prepare
the reply and his request for extension of time was summarily
rejected.
The vested
interests group had levelled charges of financial irregularities,
like claiming excess TA, purchasing new car for VC, expense of Rs
2 crore on the construction/renovation of the burnt VC lodge,
paying IT from the university fund, purchasing furniture for VC
lodge from Kerala, fooding from University Guest House, providing
the Registrar a furnished house, spending crores of rupees on the
security of the university, acting against the Act, statute and
ordinances of the university, not bringing the AMU Old Boys
representatives into the university court, presiding over the
meeting without quorum, paying more fees to advocates etc. Your
browser may not support display of this image.
This writer,
an alumnus of AMU, has gone through each and every allegation and
the university’s threadbare reply thereto and has found nothing
cognizable.
Prof. PK Abdul
Azis assumed the office of VC in June 2007. Before that, he was
the VC of the Cochin University.
Since the
complainants are vested groups and the complaint is motivated by
extraneous considerations, certain professors of the university
made counter allegations against these pursuits, indicating their
past records and business interests involved in the university.
Here is an
example: Mr. Khursheed Ahmad Khan (a member of EC) joined the
university as mere Grade-II employee in 1959 and retired as Dy.
Finance Officer in 1998. He was placed under suspension from 1983
to 1985. The charges were of gross misconduct. But, somehow he
managed to get out of it. He was suspended during the term of
Saiyid Hamid. He got university contracts for the last two decades
ranging from shoes meant for security staff to
building/construction in the university though his son, Mr. Tariq
Ahmad Khan who runs a firm by the name and style of “M/s K. T.
International” at Badar Bagh, Aligarh. He was also pressurising
the VC to privatise the Central Automobile workshop and the
university petrol pump so that its contract may be given to his
sons. The contracts for uniforms/clothes have been given to the
Gandhi Ashram and has made Khursheed Ahmad Khan more hostile to
the present VC who wanted to run the university as per rules
without aligning himself to any group and going his own neutral
way.
Below are
extracts of some of the main allegations against the present VC
and the replies offered by him after getting them duly approved by
the EC. The VC has annexed very important documents in proof of
the reply/rebuttal which shows beyond doubt that nothing was
irregular. Vouchers and bills indicate the expenses to be
reasonable. Your browser may not support display of this image.
Allegation
No. 1 to 4:
these relate to holding of the special EC meeting on 18 Feb. 2009
on short notice, and instead of discussing only one agenda for
which the special meeting was called, the VC, in his capacity as
the chairperson of the EC, included six more items on the agenda
and the adjourned meeting of 24 Feb. 2009 was held without proper
quorum of 15 members.
Reply:
The special meeting dated 18 Feb. 2009 was convened by giving
sufficient notice on the order of the Ho'nble Allahabad High Court
to consider the matter related to the adoption of model guidelines
and ordinances concerning re-employment of superannuated teachers.
All agenda items were earlier listed and circulated in the agenda
of the previous meetings. There are past precedents where more
than one agenda was taken up. (The details of such meetings have
been given in the reply). The special meeting slated for 18
February 2009 was adjourned due to an artificially created lack of
quorum by the complainants themselves. They were available in
Aligarh to attend the said meeting but absented themselves and did
not allow others to attend the meeting leading to lack of quorum.
Similar was the situation in the adjourned meeting held on 24 Feb.
2009. There was no quorum but the VC/Chairman gave his ruling that
the present members shall form the quorum for the purpose of this
meting. This writer is of the opinion that the transaction of the
adjourned meeting was perfectly legal in view of the statutory
provision which says, "In due adjourned meeting of the EC, if the
quorum is not present within half an hour from the time appointed
for holding the meeting, the members present shall be a quorum and
proceed with agenda items.” This writer is of the opinion that the
lack of quorum in the two meeting was not a natural phenomenon but
was engineered with the ulterior motive of frustrating the meeting
and demoralise the VC. Audio recordings of two previous EC
meetings dated 21 June 2008 and 30 August 2008 have been annexed
with the reply to prove that these persons unsuccessfully tried to
scuttle the said meetings which was undemocratic and unbecoming of
members of the most powerful body of the AMU. Your browser may not
support display of this image.
Allegations
5-6:
These allegations relate to financial irregularities on the part
of the present VC. “Extortionate Travel Expenses” of nearly Rs 5
lakh in one year, like (i) he committed a grave financial
irregularity by charging the university TA/DA of Rs 81,654 on his
first joining the university as the VC as expenses for four
persons, i.e., his wife, two children and himself coming from
Kerala, (ii) he got sanctioned Rs 93,053 under Home Travel
Concession for sending his family of three persons to Kerala,
(iii) visited JMI as Chief Guest of 26th All India ASLI Conference
for which he charged fare via Cochin and claimed TA/DA of Rs
64,143 and taxi charges of Rs 12,797 hired in Cochin, (iv) there
appears to be no charges for his travel to Thiruvanthapuram, but
he has claimed taxi charges of Rs 15000 for local travel there,
and (v) “suspicious claim” for travel expense to deliver Key Note
Address at a conference organised by Markaz Saqafati Sunniya at
Kozhikode, Kerala from 15 to 18 January, 2009 whereas apropos of
the news item "No need to amend statute: Aligarh VC” shows him to
be on a personal visit to the IUML State President Panakkad Syed
Mohammed Ali Shihab Thangal.
Reply:
All travel expenses are as per rule (documents annexed). The TA/DA
has been justified quoting relevant rules from Swamy's book. Such
TA/DA are admissible only if the transfer is in public interest.
Appointment of the VC is in public interest since he was working
as VC in the Cochin University of Science and Technology prior to
his appointment in the University. Therefore, he and his family
are entitled to get transfer TA according to the Rules. The AMU
has accorded this facility to all the previous VCs and there was
no exception to the present incumbent. Availing HTC is as per
rules vide Swamy’s CCS, LTC Rules. The family of the VC has
availed the benefit of HTC Scheme during 2007-09 and no violation
of any rules had been made. He visited Kochi and Delhi as per
office memo dated 18 December 2007. No claims have been made for
his visit to Jamia. As per TA Rule II (i), the VC and the PVC may
travel by air at their own discretion (relevant rule annexed). He
visited Thiruvananthapuram and Cochin as per Office Memo dated 23
October 2008 (annexure-I). Taxi charges were claimed from the
airport to Cochin to Thiruvananthapuram. He went to Kozhikode to
attend the conference organised by the Markaz which he did attend
(see programme sheet Annexure I). He had called on Panicked
Mohammed Ali Shihab Thangal at Pannakad on his way from Kochi to
Kohzikode. Taxi from Kochi to Markaz was arranged by the Markaz.
Your browser may not support display of this image.
Allegation
7:
The present VC and the Registrar Prof. VK Abdul Jaleel had their
Income Tax for the financial year 2007-08 paid out of the
University and from the head of accounts, "Recoveries of Salary".
Reply:
Since both the VC and the Registrar came from the Cochin
University and the Shankaracharaya Sanskrit University, Kalady
respectively, despite repeated reminders from our university, the
said universities sent their form 16 only in April, 2008, which
compelled the AMU to pay IT as loan which was recovered from them
in the financial year 2008-09 at 7% interest. There was no audit
objection. Such precedents are galore vide Annexure K.
Allegation
8:
As per rule, the VC is to be provided free furnished accommodation
and a car whereas he is enjoying free breakfast, lunch, dinner and
other contingent benefits from the University Guest House and his
office has four Luxury air conditioned cars in running condition,
with the last one a Civic Honda worth Rs 12,31,000 purchased
immediately after his joining despite notification for adoption of
austerity measures by the UGC and the PM.
Reply:
It is asserted that no additional benefits of any kind have been
extended to the present VC, whatsoever, which were not extended to
the previous VCs for last six decades. Hence, the allegations are
totally false. The car used by the VC was damaged by girl students
on 11 September 2007 and other cars were 7-years-old. Hence one
Segment “B” car (Civic Honda) was purchased. There are past
precedents also in this regard. After his joining, the VC
transferred two cars to the Central Automobile Workshop for the
general use of the university. No such facilities as alleged were
made available to the VC by the University Guest House. It is an
out right false allegation. The VC office has only two cars, viz.,
Honda Civic (UP81 X8308) and Ambassador (UP81 R8584). Your browser
may not support display of this image.
Allegation
9:
The VC lodge was partly damaged in the arson and violence by the
students in Sept., 2007. The lodge was insured for Rs 1 crore. The
VC without waiting for the insurance claim, spent more than Rs 2
crores, a disproportionate amount, on the renovation, installing
central A/c and purchase of furniture worth Rs 50 lakh from Kerala
which has virtually turned the VC lodge into a 5-star hotel,
despite protests from various bodies.
Reply:
When the VC occupied the Lodge initially, he did not request for
any renovation. It is wrong to say that the lodge was “partly”
damaged. After the murder of a student on the campus, the lodge
was completely damaged, laptop etc were looted, building was put
on fire (photographs have been annexed with the reply). All this
happened in the night of 16-17th Sept., 2007. The VC had no place
to live in. Instead, of hiring a suitable residence in the city,
the VC had opted to stay within the campus although the situation
was very precarious. In the teeth of threat to his life, he opted
to share the house where Registrar was living. He stayed in a
small facility for nearly one year. The plan of renovation was
prepared by the Building Deptt. of the University. The Lodge has
been renovated with all modern facilities taking in view the
requirement of the next 50 years. Purchases were made by fully
observing the Store Purchase Rules. Rs 71 lakh on civil work and
Rs 41 lakh on A/c have been spent. Insurance claim is awaited. As
soon as it is recovered, it will be credited to the revenue of the
AMU. The Central Purchase Committee comprising of some of the
present complainants visited many furniture shops and invited
quotations which were very high.
The rate of
the Kerala Firm, namely, TIP TOP, was Rs 3,997,173 whereas the
lowest cost of Delhi firm, namely, INDUS was 5,155,522. The
Central Purchase Committee unanimously approved the Kerala
quotation and furniture worth Rs 39.40 lakh was purchased and not
for Rs 50 lakhs as is falsely alleged. Your browser may not
support display of this image.
The present VC
is living alone in the VC lodge (he has sent away his family to
Kerala due to threat perception). The VC lodge is used to
house/host dignitaries like former PMs, foreign dignitaries,
diplomats, Governors and judges etc where they stay as guests of
the VC. Guest House facilities are extended to the VC lodge on
such occasions only.
Allegation
10:
The VC does not inform the EC about his leave which is against the
University rules.
Reply:
The VC. has not to date availed any sort of leave.
Allegations
11-12:
This pertains to the alleged irregular appointment of the present
Registrar of the AMU, Prof. VK Abdul Jaleel. The VC is providing
him undue benefits like well-furnished higher category
accommodation though he is entitled to unfurnished rented
accommodation with 10 percent of the salary as allowance etc.
Reply:
The Registrar was appointed on deputation as per statute 5 (3) r/w
clause 3(f) of Ordinance. It was reported and approved by the EC
on 14 July 2007. All allegations are false. There is no official
residence for the Registrar available in the university. He is
residing in the PVC lodge maintained by the University Guest
House. He has not been paid house rent allowance from the date of
living at the said place till date. Previously also, Registrars
used to be given furnished accommodation. The Registrar is being
paid honorarium of 10 percent of his salary for the additional
work assigned to him which is as per rule. Previous Registrars
also received such amounts for their additional works.
Allegations
13-14:
The VC has spent crores of rupees on the super high security of
the university on his personal threat perception. The VC has spent
crores of rupees on erecting boundary walls.
Your browser
may not support display of this image. Reply: The allegation is
false. The security system of the university had to be tightened
on the advice of the HRD/Home Ministries. A high power committee
consisting of representatives of the MHRD, Home Ministry, UP
Police and university officers had finalised the plan.
The budget had
been approved by the UGC under XI Plan recommendations. The EC
held on 21 Sept, 2007 had resolved to establish a foolproof
security system in the university and demanded Z category security
for the VC. The VC, the Hony. Treasurer (a complainant) and
another member of the EC (who is also complainant), met the HRD
Minister Mr. Arjun Singh on 24 Sept. 2007 and demanded the
deployment of CISF/CRPF or any other central forces on the campus
of the AMU to maintain and enforce law and order and provide
complete security to the University, provide special armed
security cover to the VC at his residence and office as there is
threat to his life and provide sufficient budgetary support under
XIth Plan. There was another meeting with Special Secretary (IS),
Home Ministry, Govt. of India, including DGP (UP Police), DG (CISF),
JS (IS), JS (P), JS (MHRD), JD (IB), VC, Registrar and Proctor on
27 Sept. 2007. There was yet another meeting with Shri Arjun
Singh, then Union HRD Minister, attended by the VC, Mr. RP Agarwal,
Secretary, MHRD, Mr. Sunil Kumar, JS (MHRD) during which the HRD
ministry promised to provide full security to the university in a
phased manner. Raising of boundary wall is a part of the security
system. The AMU was the only university without a proper boundary
wall because of its peculiar geography. The proposals for security
measures submitted to the UGC were routed through the bodies of
the university, i.e., Finance Committee and the EC. Two of the
complainants were members of the above authorities. They did not
object. Now they are objecting due to an oblique motive. An amount
of Rs 292.23 lakh was demanded from the UGC and the same was
released for this purpose. Your browser may not support display of
this image.
Allegation
15:
Despite the existence of a full-fledged Building Department manned
by 125 staffers, the allotment of the construction work to the
CPWD worth crores of rupees is going unchecked and requires
enquiry.
Reply:
The practice of awarding work was started to avoid delay in
construction projects and corruption in the award of construction.
Awarding work to the CPWD is a standard practice. It was done in
the interest of the university and was approved by the EC.
Allegation
15 (No. 21 in the original complaint):
The VC transferred Rs 8 crores of the PF from the SBI to the
Shreyas Grameen Bank, which again was re-transferred to the SBI.
Reply:
The rate of interest in the Shreyas Grameen Bank was 10% per annum
while in the SBI it was only 8.5%. Hence, the amount was
transferred from one bank to another. Subsequently, the interest
rate of SBI became 11% per annum and therefore the amount was
re-transferred to the SBI. All this was done after approval from
the EC.
The present
vested interests group is not likely to succeed in its designs as
the entire allegations are false, peripheral and trivial. But, if
it succeeds, as it has access to political echelons in Delhi and
elsewhere, the result will be catastrophic for the university.
The current
VC, who came to Aligarh with a pledge and dream to do something
for the university, will not be in a position to do anything. The
next VC, after alighting at the Aligarh railway station, will
first pay a visit to the abode of this group and then only go to
his lodge. It should be the concern of every citizen of the
country, particularly the educated Muslims, not to allow such
vested interest groups to hold the university at ransom and
blackmail the present VC who received more votes than any other
previous VC. If there are problems, they should be solved inside
the university institutions. Dirty linen should not be washed in
the public. Your browser may not support display of this image.
Genesis of the
allegations
All the
allegations are generic in nature. There is no whisper anywhere
that in the process any commission/kickback were received.
Allegations of TA/DA seem prima facie false. There is no
allegation that in construction/renovation of the VC lodge, or in
transferring the money from one bank to another, or in spending
crores of rupees on the security and the boundary walls of the
university, any commission was taken. In view of cold-blooded
murders of innocent students, rampant cases of stabbing, stay of
local criminals inside hostels, burning of the inside parts of the
VC lodge to ashes in the night of 16-17 Sept., 2007, ransacking of
the administrative block etc by girl students, damage of Procter's
office, imminent danger to the life of the VC warranted high
security on the campus. It is the result of this high security
manned by automatic cameras that there is complete peace on the
campus at present. Examinations are being held on time. Academic
sessions are going on as per schedule. Students are busy in their
studies with a full sense of security. A good number of students
have made to the Civil Services.
After all, who
are the main architects of the complaint under reference? Some of
them are known for their notoriety and vested interest. It is this
vested interest group which took the contracts of the university
for the last two decades but when the same was given to the CPWD,
they were up in arms. They want the Central Automobile Workshop
and the University Petrol Pump to be privatised so that they may
get the contracts. There are vested groups in the university. This
is the only university where 95% of the employees and teachers are
products of the same university.
They study
there, get employment there and get a house constructed in the
vicinity of the university, then they start all sorts of tricks,
pressures, conspiracies and nuisance activity in order to get
their sons/daughters/other relatives employed in the university as
teaching or non-teaching staff. If the present VC has committed
financial or other irregularities, there must be an enquiry. But
if the complaint is motivated by personal interest and vendetta,
it must be rejected at the threshold and the complanants punished.
It is heartening that the Hon'ble Visitor has sent back the
complaint to the HRD Ministry. It is hoped that Kapil Sibal, the
new Union HRD Minister who himself is a great lawyer and jurist
and a messiah of the minorities, will sense the evil design and
jettison the frivolous complaint to discourage the vested group
and allow the university to blossom and prosper. Your browser may
not support display of this image. (The
Milli Gazette)
The author is Advocate, Supreme Court of India
Muslim MPs finally at work- 
Jamia Millia VC row: Why Prof Mushirul Hasan being opposed 2nd term: 
Readying for the
Battle Ahead
"
"No Muslim child in India to be left behind for education”:
From Amroha To The Moon:
Salman
Khurshid on an announcement spree. But Muslims not impressed - 
Aid, Madrasa Board not acceptable to Maharashtra Ulema
Comment on this article
I
The way people are living in Malegaon surprised the
French student: 
An
Information Outlet:
Urdu Library in Malegaon turned 100
this year and the library, which has helped many Ph. Ds in their
research work, is all set to...