AMU : AMUSSC reject deans report

AMUSSC reject deans report
Written by AMU Correspondent
Saturday, 14 November 2009
The Aligarh Muslim University Students Struggle Committee (AMUSSC) has unanimously decided to reject the report submitted by the Committee of Deans constituted by the Hon'ble Vice Chancellor to examine in detail the grievances of the AMU students. Without being cynical but being critical about the Committee and its recommendations, the AMUSSC wish to ask certain questions to the Vice-Chancellor at a moment when he is not ready to leave his confrontationist attitude with the students and still continuing with his autocratic style of functioning. Question No.1- When there was already a Students Grievance Redressal Committee(SGRC) formed by Vice-Chancellor, why just before declaring sine die he decided to form a Committee of Deans to look into the grievances of the students of AMU. So is the Hon'ble Vice-Chancellor has agreed that the SGRC was a defunct body and it was a periodic drama staged by the university officials for their trumpet blowing about being sympathetic to the students causes as claimed by the members of AMUSSC for a long time? Question No.2- When almost every student of the campus was on the roads at the campus to claim the ignorance of the Vice-Chancellor towards them he preferred to send us out of the campus. Now what are the credentials of this report which was constituted after sine die when there are no students at the campus? When no students present at the campus the committee of Deans did the survey with which party? Teachers? Technical Staff? 4th Grade Employees? Did they ask the walls or their conscience to research on the grievances of the students in detail? At one place PRO wrote "Students emphasized", who are these selected students? Has the Vice-Chancellor and Committee of Deans has the right to lie and make their own "grievances of students" without consulting them and to act on them as they prefer so. Whether this should be called democracy or another great step of autocracy at AMU? We leave things on our old boys.If such issues has all of a sudden propped up in their mind it means they were already an issue and Vice-Chancellor preferred to lie and blow the trumpet with one after another fake Press Released by its PRO on the Students Grievance Redressal Committee. Question No.3- If such was the case as mentioned in the question no.2 then which options were left to wake up this administration which never heeded to the students? So if students have to resort to the democratic means to voice loud their grievances then why they are being suspended and imposed with campus ban? So AMU administration also ratifies the fact with this committee that if somebody speaks up, he would be prosecuted even in the wrong way. AMUSSC after this report of the Committee again proudly claim that they represented the entire AMU students in this struggle. Question No.4- On the issue of Students Union, AMUSSC would like to ask the AMU administration why even after 2 years of earlier sine die they are not sure about the academic environment in the campus? So, whether they are accepting their total failure not to maintain the academic environment for that long? Whether the responsible person for all these malaise should be prosecuted as happen with students? Whether the AMU administration can define the academic environment in light of the best universities in the world? It seems that AMU administration has not gone through Lyngdoh Recommendation on Students Union. Why AMU administration doesn't like to hold Students Union election this session as referred "must" in 6.1.1 of the Lyngdoh? Not only that, why AMU has time and again preferred to bypass statutes (34, 14, 18) passed in parliament to give students legitimate representation at the AMU Court and Academic Council. Then how come the Press Release can claim that Vice Chancellor has expressed his firm belief in democratic values? Is it another bluff again? It would be great if Vice-Chancellor himself decide to cease to be Patron of the AMUSU, following the recommendation he himself ratified of Committee of Deans to follow Lyngdoh report where it is written in 6.1.8 "No faculty member, nor any member of the administration shall be permitted to hold any post on the executive of such representative body, nor shall be allowed to be a member of any such representative body". Hope the Ordinances where he has power to dissolve the AMUSU in "good faith" would be obsolete then, so the power of Hony.Treasurer would go. You have to follow the whole report as you promised sir. The Committee of Deans without asking students got to know about the behavior of the Proctorial Team and for that matter of fact AMUSSC congratulate them to ratify another claim that the entire team of DSW and Proctor were functioning like Myanmar Junta. This report that has been submitted look like another bluff by the administration towards the students where administration themselves decided without hearing students in their personal interest to keep their autocratic power to dominate over the students unchallenged. However we agree many pertinent points has been covered by it, but there are some unacceptable solutions and goes against the law itself. AMU Students Struggle Committee strongly presses for democratic solution to the problems of students and not by people unaware of the students causes till date. AMU Students Struggle Committee