Report: S. Muneer
Aligarh: DA new debate has erupted across the Aligarh Muslim University campus and on social media following the Divisional Horticulture Development Seminar held in the historic Kennedy Hall of Aligarh Muslim University. The program, which echoed with Saraswati Puja, Saraswati Vandana, and slogans of “Jai Shri Ram” and “Har Har Mahadev,” has not only raised questions about the university’s traditions and identity but has also sparked discussions regarding the conduct of the AMU administration.
However,
aAfter the event a , backlash on the campus forced the administration to go into a damage control mode. The campus is writ large with the an impression has emerged that the University the administration is attempting to distance itself from the entire matter. The question raising its head being raised is that if the program was held on the university campus, in its most prominent venue, Kennedy Hall, with the permission and approval of the university administration, then why is it that after the event why is there is an effort to an appearance of disassociateion being projected now?with the event.
Prior to the event, some students had submitted a memorandum to the administration expressing their objections. According to the students, the Proctor had assured them that it was not a political program but a government event related to the development of farmers and horticulture. However, the scenes witnessed during the program have led many to question that assurance. However, an event is allowed in the Kenedy Hall only after an explicit permission of the Director of Cultural Education Centre (CEC).
Meanwhile, during a conversation with the media, the MIC PRO clarified that the program did not belong to AMU but to the state government, and that the university had merely provided the venue. The campus is abuzz with suspicion that this is reply is an afterthought to cover up what most feel the blunder. The Ms Vibha Sharma, MIC PRO, is a department colleague of the Director of the CEC. However, when asked about the details of the event, the MIC PRO she informed that stated that she herself did had not attended the program. This has erupted into Following this statement, a key question now has been circulating on campus that: if an important state government event is organized within the university, do the responsible university officials not attend it.? The spice is added to the fact
What has added to the surprise is the claim that no official press release regarding the event was issued by AMU PROU’s Public Relations Office, whereas details of details of important events inheld at the university are usually shared with the media. The reply has created further misgivings on the campus with regard to the event.
Some students, alumni, and individuals associated with the university argue that such a program does not align with the traditions of the university or the ideals of its founder, Sir Syed Ahmad Khan. According to them, the event held in the Kennedy Hall had no direct connection with academic activities of the university, and therefore the university administration, especially the Director, CEC, should have given more serious consideration to various aspects of the program before granting permission.
The matter has also generated a strong reaction on social media, s. Several posts have accused the university administration of ignoring the institution’s historical identity and traditions. Critics have also questioned the silence of the AMU Teachers’ Association, student organizations, and other sections of the university community.
It may be recalled that the chief guest at the government-sponsored event held in Kennedy Hall on Friday was Uttar Pradesh Minister of State for Horticulture, Dinesh Pratap Singh. The Minister dDuring his address raised the , slogans of “Bharat Mata Ki Jai” were raised, followed by chants of “Jai Shri Ram” and “Har Har Mahadev.”. Observers say that perhaps for the first time in AMU’s history, slogans of this nature were raised from an official stage inside the university. A large number of BJP supporters wearing saffron scarves were also present in the hall, whereas, an office memo vide no. 2580/Proc issued on 20.08.2018 for wide circulation clearly stated at point 4 that “Display on the person or on any vehicle or through any mode/device of insignia/symbol/indicating affiliation to any political enity/group is strictly prohibited in AMU campus and its maintained institution”. Students and teachers alike want to know the official who violated this order of the Vice Chancellor and demand that the university should proceed with a thorough inquiry into the holding of the event that has brought down the prestige of this institution. .
Political reactions followed the event as well. The Samajwadi Party alleged that a government function had been given a political colour. In his speech, Minister Dinesh Pratap Singh stated that this was the government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath. Describing himself as a follower of Sanatan Dharma, he said that he could take every possible step to promote Indian culture in Aligarh.
During the event, some farmers from Mathura also raised slogans in praise of Giriraj Ji and Banke Bihari Lal. Traditionally, most programs in Kennedy Hall have begun with recitations from the Holy Quran and concluded with the university anthem. For this reason, the developments witnessed during this event have triggered a fresh debate.
The fundamental question now being raised is: if the administration was already aware of the nature of the program prior to the event, why was permission granted? And if permission was granted, why does there now appear to be an attempt to distance itself from the event? Discussions on campus are intensifying around the perception that the administration facilitated the program by providing the venue and then subsequently attemptinged to dispel an accusation of it being a party to the event. portray itself as separate from it.
Some students also argue that in the past, the university administration has adopted a strict stance in matters involving religious or political expressions. Their question is that if the administration intervened or imposed restrictions on various occasions, why does is its approach appear different in this case? These questions are currently being debatedraising a lot of dust across the campus, with various groups seeking clarification from the administration.
In this connection, attempts were made to contact AMU MIC PRO Professor Vibha Sharma by telephone, but she could not be reached.
