Report – Shozab Muneer
Times of Taj broke the news on Feb 19, 2025 titled “Financial embezzlement in AMU”, bringing to light the irregularities in the handling of the finances of the Centre for Promotion of Educational and Cultural Advancement of Muslims of India (CEPECAMI). The news pointed out that there seems to be no accountability for the expenditure of its budgetary funds of the last four years as gathered from the replies to the RTI application. On publishing this news item, further aspects of mismanagement/under-management of the Centre are located. In a response to an RTI query asking for “…the number of Ordinary Members reappointed during the last four years and its basis…”, the CPIO of the Centre has provided ‘NO INFORMATION’ under the guise that “The query is not clear”. The disposal of the Appeal against it by the Appellate Authority, the Director of the Centre, clarifies, “The query is not clear as it does not mention the authority/body about member of which the information is sought”. The Ordinances provide that the Vice Chancellor shall nominate Ordinary Members for TWO years. The term ‘Ordinary’ only occurs once in the Ordinances, with added emphasis, attached to the Members of Board of Management. The information it appears is being concealed since the Director of the Centre and the AMU Vice Chancellor have not fulfilled their duties to ensure proper functioning of the Centre to uplift the educational and cultural advancement of Muslims of India. To a query on the number and dates of meetings of the Board of Management, which is to have ten Ordinary Members with “specialised knowledge and aptitude towards the upliftment of Muslim Community” to be nominated by the Vice Chancellor, the reply is NIL. Not holding meetings of the Board of Management indicates the AMU Vice Chancellor and the Director feel no importance towards the fulfilling of the purpose of the Centre to uplift the educational and cultural advancement of Muslims of India. This is strengthened by no reply given to a query regarding fulfilling of the objectives of the Centre provided in the Ordinances instead annual reports have been supplied to mislead. A query was made as to the budgetary requirements of the Centre presented to the Board of Management, the reply again is ‘NIL’, which clearly displays a non-adherence to the principle of accountability embedded in the Ordinances, especially in financial handling.
In a reply to another RTI application requiring file movement of a file number R- 5342/ T dated 23.09.2023, which required a review of the continuation of Directors of various Centres of the University by an elected member to the Executive Council of the University. The continuation of the Director of this Centre was also required to be reviewed, the file was moved by the Administration (Teaching) on 23.09.2023 and reached the Registrar Secretariat after more than two months vide number 4785/Reg on 28.11.2023, which was on the very day received in the Vice Chancellor’s office vide number R-6203/VC.
The reply to this RTI application on 27.12.2024 by the CPIO/VC Secretariat is “The file is under consideration of the Vice Chancellor” and therefore there is no movement. In other words, according to the reply the Vice Chancellor has not been able to take a decision on the file in MORE THAN ONE YEAR, since it reached the Vice Chancellor on 28.11.2023, whereas during this period there have been two Vice Chancellors, one acting and the other permanent, the former being the husband, Prof Mohd Gulrez, of the latter Prof Nai ma Khatoon. The reply of the CPIO/VC Secretariat on the query of reason for delay in making the decision on the file is “The query…is not under purview of the RTI Act 2005”, without referring to any Section of the RTI Act that so provides. This leads one to assume that there is no substantial reason except carelessness and indifference towards the functioning of the Centre for Promotion of Educational and Cultural Advancement of Muslims of India.
An appeal was made against the replies of the CPIO/VC Secretariat the Appellate Authority informed the file has been sent “…to Registrar on the same number dated 03.02.2025”, which is after the filling of the RTI application on 09.12.2024, after nearly ONE YEAR TWO months from the date it reached the Vice Chancellor office.
The RTI applicant says the decision on the file and despatching it is after the RTI application, which shows the utility of RTI Act, 2005 and he encourages everyone to exercise the Right to information to get work done.
However, the replies to the RTI applications show the indifference of the AMU administration towards the Centre responsible for the upliftment of the cultural and educational ethos of Muslims of India.
The MIC PRO was approached both telephonically and through WhatsApp message regarding the reason for the delay by the Vice Chancellor in disposing of this file. However, no reply was received till the publication of this news.
