Report… Shozab Muneer
Aligarh.Question arises after a letter issued to Prof Reyazuddin department of Chemistry by the AMU Registrar, in that letter AMU Registrar mentioned that, “Now, therefore, I have been directed to seek your explanation on the aforementioned complaint”. However, at the end it says this is issued with the approval of the Vice Chancellor. It appears from the text as if the Registrar was directed by someone else but was finally approved by the Vice Chancellor. In short, it appears now that confidential matter such Inquires is not confidential but public affair. It is because of this that the memos issued for explanations/inquiry are not marked ‘confidential’ any more. Now no enquiry is confidential in AMU, enquiries are public?
A letter (No.D/DE/ 123/SC/GF-01 of 17th DEC2024) was issued by the AMU Registrar, through the Chairman, Department of Chemistry to the individual teacher. The letter mentions that a complaint dated 16.11.2024 addressed to the Vice-Chancellor, was received against you from Dr Ishaat Mohammad Khan, Associate Professor, Department of Chemistry. It is alleged that on 20.09.2024, you sent through registered post, 22 copies of a letter under the fake name of a female, to various persons, including the Vice-Chancellor, Presiding Officer of Internal Complaints Committee, some Executive Council Members and other recipients, with the intention of harming Dr Ishaat’s academic pursuits and maligning his image. The contents of the pseudonymous letter, inter alia, harm the reputation of female scholars of the Department of Chemistry, make a religious reference which could affect communal harmony and bring into disrepute the University, the Department of Chemistry and some teachers, by alleging leakage of PhD test paper, examination papers and undue favours. A copy of the letter is also marked to the Superintendent of Police (SSP), Aligarh, clearly desiring criminal justice action under allegedly false claims.
Whereas, Dr Ishaat Mohammad Khan has provided substantial evidence in support of his allegations against you, which include, inter alia, CCTV footage from the post office wherein you are seen to be receiving receipts of the above mentioned registered letters, audio and video files and photos of your confession made in the presence of ASP/CO-III on 12.11.2024 and names and signatures of four faculty members of the University who were witnesses present during your confession.
Whereas, the Competent Authority has noted that your actions in the light of the contents of the letter allegedly posted by you are prima facie to be treated as ‘misconduct’ violative of the following provisions of Clause 12 of Section -III of the Teachers’ Conduct and Discipline rules, 2020, approved on behalf of the Executive Council under Section 19(3) of the AMU Amendment Act XL of 1920, notified vide D.No. (C)/2633 dated April 30th, 2020;
(h) Acts of fraud or forgery or other dishonesty committed during the course of his/her duties
(1) Acts of indecency… or other acts of moral turpitude”
Further, Clause 7 of Section-II (General Principles) of the above rules states that,
If complaint(s) against a Teacher by another teacher or other University employee is found to be malicious, vexatious or unfounded, disciplinary proceedings, as deemed necessary under the circumstances, may be initiated against the author(s) of such complaint(s).
The allegations made against you also imply failure to uphold several provisions of the Code of Professional Ethics for Teachers as adopted through Aligarh Muslim University’s Ordinance (Executive) framed in the light of UGC Regulations, 2018, including Clause 15.1 (1)(1) ‘Adhere to a responsible pattern of conduct and demeanor expected of them by the community’, clause 15.1 (III) (i)’ Treat other members of the profession in the same manner as they themselves wish to be treated’, clause 15.1 (III) (ii) Speak respectfully of other teachers and render assistance for professional betterment and clause 15.1 (III) (iii) ‘Refrain from making unsubstantiated allegations against colleagues to higher authorities’.
Now, therefore, I have been directed to seek your explanation on the aforementioned complaint made against you by Dr. Ishaat Mohammad Khan, Associate Professor, Department of Chemistry, within 07 days from the receipt of this letter. The complaint letter and the evidences provided are being attached herewith.
If no reply is received within the stipulated period, it shall be assumed that you have nothing to say in your defence, and disciplinary proceedings in accordance with the Teachers’ Conduct and Discipline Rules, 2020 read with Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal Rules), 1965 and University’s provisions may be initiated against you.
This is issued with the approval of the Vice-Chancellor. According to the experts it is strange that an FIR has not been lodged against Prof Reyazuddin when all evidences and further the letter might create communal disturbances, and bring the University and Department of Chemistry into disrepute as charged in the ‘Explanation Letter’?
Second, the senior teachers of the University are raising objection on the exercise of emergency powers under Section 19(3) of the AMU Amendment Act to frame the ‘Teachers’ Conduct and Discipline rules, 2020, approved on behalf of the Executive Council under Section 19(3) of the AMU Amendment Act? For no rules require immediate action. It should have been brought before the Academic and Executive Councils under the rules. It appears that teachers were not to be taken in confidence or make them discussants to the issue, since these bodies have teachers in it.
Again questions are being raised as to who directed the Registrar? Later on, the letter says “approval of the Vice Chancellor”. It appears that someone other than the VC directed and therefore required approval of the VC.
In this regard PRO Umar Peerzada commented nothing such as this in his knowledge.
