Report। Shozab Muneer
Aligarh, Is Aligarh Muslim University bound by the orders of the Union Ministry of Education or is the Union Ministry of Education forced to accept the procedures of AMUVC? Despite fingers having always been raised visa on AMU administration being stubborn, ignoring the law and enforcing its own procedures. The AMU administration has been putting in every possible effort to defend its own procedures instead of holding itself accountable. Now a new case has come to light, in which the Ministry of Education has written a letter to the AMU administration clearly expressing its concern regarding deterioration of its academic atmosphere by appointing teachers on two statutory posts, the Controller of Examinations and Finance Officer. The Ministry has required appointment on these posts on regular basis with two months so that teachers working on these posts, apart from their regular academic duties, are not detract from their basic duties of doing academics. However, the AMU has made no effort even after more than two months. Instead an attempt has been made to mislead through an RTI reply regarding the date of receipt of the letter from the Ministry of Education.
According to sources, the Ministry of Education has sent a letter to the AMU administration via email on November 11, 2024 and then by post on November 24, 2024, stating that the post of AMU Controller, which has been vacant since January 10, 2018, and the post of Finance Officer, which has been vacant since February 18, 2021, should be filled. It has also expressed its deep concern over the performance of teachers on these posts, saying that the temporary arrangement made by deputing teachers on these posts is not sustainable, since it affects the efficiency and effectiveness of the University. At the same time, the teachers are being overloaded, which results in obstacles for teachers in performing their main duty, i.e. teaching and academics, which in turn is disrupting the academic environment of the University. Therefore, it is requested that the posts of Controller and Finance Officer be filled and the integrity of the University be maintained and these orders be implemented within 60 days. At the same time, people say that it is unfortunate that the AMU administration, ignoring the clear orders of the Ministry of Education, is using trickery instead of appointment on both the posts.
It has become a topic of discussion in AMU that its administration has been continuously violating the rules and making appointments on various posts. In order to strengthen its hold on the AMU and reducing its dissenters appointments the VC, who is empowered only to recommend, is appointing directly on various posts usurping the powers of the Executive Council. The attraction being created for teachers to get close to the VC and get appointment on these posts, some which even carry a stipend over above the salary.
For example, the statutes for appointment of DSW, Proctor, Provost (and on his recommendation Wardens) is to be made by the Executive Council on the recommendation of the Vice Chancellor. Contrary to the rules the powers of the Executive Council are usurped by the Vice Chancellor to make appointments on these posts. The provision for the first two position requires teachers, not below the rank of Associate Professor, to be appointed, but the statutes do not require a teacher to be appointed as Provosts or Wardens of the Halls, but the Vice Chancellor usurping the powers of the Council appoints teachers on these posts. The posts for which the VC should have recommended the name and taken approval from the EC are being made directly by the VC, as a result of which the EC is becoming meaningless. Apart from the above there are about eight teachers working as OSDs, for which there is no provision in the rules. Whereas, there are no provision for posts or appointments of Member-in-Charges (MIC) teachers are appointed on these non-existing positions, although there are full time Engineers, etc. appointed against these posts sanctioned by the UGC. In other words, these appointments are made without jurisdiction. Recently, despite a fulltime Public Relations Officer employed in the University an office memo has been issued appointing an MIC Public Relations Office, as per past practice. Interestingly, the office memo does not mention the provision under which the MIC has been appointed. However, the Union Ministry of Education express concern over the impact of academic activities due to the appointment of teachers to just two posts in AMU, is under discussion amongst the teachers on the campus.
AMU has nineteen halls and eightyhostels, each Hall has a provost, each hostel has a warden and a general warden and for this presently 150 teachers are engaged, whereas there is no requirement of teachers mandated in the provision. There are eight various OSDs, whereas there no provision in law for such an appointments or posts, who are all teachers, whereas the sections already have necessary staff. The total of teachers so engaged is 198, apart from whom there are five teachers working as MICs and some have Associate MICs attached too. The total then comes approximately to 200 teachers involved in doing work on these positions, including the Controller of Examinations and Finance Officer, the grand total of teachers is approximately 200, whereas these posts either do not exist or do not require teachers to work on them or there is already adequate staff sanctioned by the UGC. In such a situation, it is a matter of concern that the educational environment and standard of AMU is not going in the right direction. It is also common to hear that when AMU VC cannot appoint Provost, Proctor, DSW contrary to the Statutes of the University queries are being raised to the legal status of these appointments? Are they all illegal? Despite the obvious illegality why are they being so continued?
At the same time, the AMU administration is hiding its procedures, in this regard, if sources are to be believed, in the reply sent to an RTI application regarding the receipt of the Ministry of Education’s letter, the date of receipt of the Ministry’s letter has also been misrepresented, and there has been a delay in the response. It is being told that an RTI for information in this regard of November 25, 2024 was sent to the CPIO/Vice Chancellor’s to which a reply was sent two days after the date mandated by the RTI Act, on December 26, 2024. In the RTI reply informed that the letter of the Ministry was received on September 24, 20245, while the truth is that the AMU received the letter through email on September 11, 2024, that is 13 days earlier. In such a situation, the question arises as to why the AMU administration is hiding the facts and on whose instructions is it doing so. At the same time, the reply said that a letter has been sent to the ministry for permission to advertise these posts are under the CRR, Cadre Recruitment Rules and therefore has been sent to the Ministry for permission to advertised the posts, whereas the Ministry in its letter has categorically directed to advertise and fill up the posts within sixty days. However, the reply conceals the despatch number by not providing it to the information seeker. Experts are interpreting this step of the AMU administration as delaying the implementation of the orders of the Ministry of Education. People also allege that the AMU administration is adopting a policy of not displeasing its special people, who belong to regional factions dominating the University.
In this regard, Controller Mr Mujeebullah Zuberi said that he has no information regarding the letter from the Ministry of Education, while Finance Officer Professor Mohsin Khan could not be reached even after calling him several times. After that, he was also sent a message, but he did not respond till the time of writing of this news.
In this regard, when the recently appointed MIC PRO was asked the provision under which the appointment of MIC was made the reply was that whoever appointed knows under which law it was done and asserted that only teachers can be appointed to such positions, whereas there is no provision for such a position in the University.Meanwhile, MIC, PRO AMU denies being aware of any letter from the Union Ministry of Education regarding the FO and Controller. The MIC also said that the posts of Finance Officer and Controller of the university are only filled by teachers, which the Vice Chancellor does at as a discretion. MIC also said that by law, the AMU Vice Chancellor has the authority to appoint anyone s/he wants, such as Proctor, DSW, Provost, without the approval of the EC or any other body. However, on being pressed to provide the provision that provides for such appointments and such discretion the MIC was silent
The AMU administration is constantly facing allegations of not following its Act, Statutes, Ordinances and Regulations in making appointments of OSDs, defying the directives of the Ministry of Education by not taking concrete steps to appoint Finance Officer and Controller, despite the Ministry of Education’s expressed concern about the development of the educational environment in AMu, retaining teachers in posts where there is no condition of being teachers, the appointment of various posts by the VC without the approval of the EC, which is a clear violation of the law, is sending a dangerous signal and is an open invitation for action by the Ministry. The appointment of the current Vice Chancellor of AMU is before the Allahabad High Court, which has expressed strong objections to the attitude of the AMU administration trying to delay the matter and has given February 11, 2025 as the date for final hearing. In such a situation, some leading figures of AMU are preparing to send a letter to the AMU Visitor, the President of India, appealing for her intervention regarding the provisions implementation of AMU Act and non-implementation of the letter of the Ministry
