PaRCha - JNU - AISA material - 2011 ID-28614
.
.
Announcement of Marks: In order to ensure more accountability and transparency, marks obtained by all students seeking admission have to be declared by the JNU administration both at the viva voce stage, as well as when the final lists of selected students are released. This is all the more the important given JNU's shocking track record, proven through RTIs filed by students over the years, which reveal a pattern of discrimination faced by students from deprived backgrounds during the interview stage. Data has shown how many a student who has performed excellently in the written exam was made ineligible through shockingly low marks awarded in the interview (to the tune of 1 or 2 marks!) .
.
.
Weightage for interview: For several years, the JNU administration has been allocating a weightage of 30% for interviews in the selection process for JNU's M.Phil programmes. Not just is this illegal, it also leaves ample scope for discrimination, as has been narrated above. Therefore, the weightage for interviews in the admission process should be reduced to 10%. .
.
.
Hold JNU Administration Accountable For Scuttling Democratic Decision-making Processes: .
In the recent past, we have seen how the JNU administration has subverted and undermined various decision-making bodies, including the Academic Council. The upcoming AC must the following issues: .
.
On 18th March 2010, the AC decided to reject the Aditya Mukherjee Committees faulty cut-off criterion for OBC students. Following this directive, the Deans Committee approved a change in JNU's admission procedure by incorporating the correct cut-off criteria on June 17th 2010. How was the AC decision of March 18th 2010 unilaterally subverted by the JNU administration on July 12th 2010 without even informing the AC? .
.
.
This act of the JNU administration to overrule the AC decision resulted in 277 OBC students being denied admission last year alone. Who in the JNU administration will take responsibility for this criminal victimization? .
.
.
When the Delhi HC ruled against the JNU administration in its 7th September judgment, why did the JNU administration not implement the verdict, and offer admission to the 277 victimized students? .
.
.
Who in the JNU administration took the decision to challenge the HC verdict? How was this decision taken, without consulting any democratic decision-making body in JNU? .
.
.
It is by now well-known that at least three key persons in the administration the Director of Admissions, the Coordinator (Evaluations) and the Registrar (in whose name JNU had filed the review petition in the Delhi HC against the HC verdict OBC reservations) have known anti-reservation ideological positions which they had been foisting on the JNU community along with the outgoing VC, bypassing all decision-making bodies in the process. It is therefore absolutely essential that the upcoming AC demand accountability, since these officials continue to hold influential posts in the JNU administration. .
There are other important issues too which the AC will have to address. As mentioned in the Charter of Demands submitted to the JNU administration, the scope of recognition of Aleemiyat Fazeelat certificates has to be expanded. When madarsa certificates were first recognized in 2008 by JNUs AC, it was decided that recognition would gradually be expanded to include new madarsas too. This has not yet happened, and needs to be done. .
.
.
PaRCha - JNU - AISA material - 2011 ID-28614
.
.
Announcement of Marks: In order to ensure more accountability and transparency, marks obtained by all students seeking admission have to be declared by the JNU administration both at the viva voce stage, as well as when the final lists of selected students are released. This is all the more the important given JNU's shocking track record, proven through RTIs filed by students over the years, which reveal a pattern of discrimination faced by students from deprived backgrounds during the interview stage. Data has shown how many a student who has performed excellently in the written exam was made ineligible through shockingly low marks awarded in the interview (to the tune of 1 or 2 marks!) .
.
.
Weightage for interview: For several years, the JNU administration has been allocating a weightage of 30% for interviews in the selection process for JNU's M.Phil programmes. Not just is this illegal, it also leaves ample scope for discrimination, as has been narrated above. Therefore, the weightage for interviews in the admission process should be reduced to 10%. .
.
.
Hold JNU Administration Accountable For Scuttling Democratic Decision-making Processes: .
In the recent past, we have seen how the JNU administration has subverted and undermined various decision-making bodies, including the Academic Council. The upcoming AC must the following issues: .
.
On 18th March 2010, the AC decided to reject the Aditya Mukherjee Committees faulty cut-off criterion for OBC students. Following this directive, the Deans Committee approved a change in JNU's admission procedure by incorporating the correct cut-off criteria on June 17th 2010. How was the AC decision of March 18th 2010 unilaterally subverted by the JNU administration on July 12th 2010 without even informing the AC? .
.
.
This act of the JNU administration to overrule the AC decision resulted in 277 OBC students being denied admission last year alone. Who in the JNU administration will take responsibility for this criminal victimization? .
.
.
When the Delhi HC ruled against the JNU administration in its 7th September judgment, why did the JNU administration not implement the verdict, and offer admission to the 277 victimized students? .
.
.
Who in the JNU administration took the decision to challenge the HC verdict? How was this decision taken, without consulting any democratic decision-making body in JNU? .
.
.
It is by now well-known that at least three key persons in the administration the Director of Admissions, the Coordinator (Evaluations) and the Registrar (in whose name JNU had filed the review petition in the Delhi HC against the HC verdict OBC reservations) have known anti-reservation ideological positions which they had been foisting on the JNU community along with the outgoing VC, bypassing all decision-making bodies in the process. It is therefore absolutely essential that the upcoming AC demand accountability, since these officials continue to hold influential posts in the JNU administration. .
There are other important issues too which the AC will have to address. As mentioned in the Charter of Demands submitted to the JNU administration, the scope of recognition of Aleemiyat Fazeelat certificates has to be expanded. When madarsa certificates were first recognized in 2008 by JNUs AC, it was decided that recognition would gradually be expanded to include new madarsas too. This has not yet happened, and needs to be done. .
.
.