PaRCha - JNU - All Organisations - 2008 ID-47902

.

and the waiting list, thus coming up with the figure: ·of .

This means de1r seat cu~ which JNUSU lendcrshlp or the 2043 for this year as opposed to last year's 2012. .

and from the first list 26 students take admission. ~.

administration however declined to ar;;knowledgc. Suppose in some center 30 seats are offered this year The .tcldecnic Coundl dedded this scrl'pplng of tho Through the waiting list 4 students will be offered seats prevailing 'offer' system for the 'w~ltllst' systcnl In May. to replace the four who did not take admission, but the .

The JNUS~·AISA now daln1s lhJt In the AC rt1ectJng they seats offered remains still at 30. By JNUSU's calculation .

took a PQSJtion In favour oftho 'offer' vten1 rmd not 30 but 34 seats were offered in this particular against the ,regressive 'wnltllst' sy~t~rn pu&hecl by th .

administrationl which w~s tinnily odopted l.>y n rnojority center! JNUSU deliberately misinformed and .

vote. However from the thnc thQissu~ of scrJt cut spread an inflated offer figure of 2043 seats in .

came to the fore until the UGilM tho JNUSU·AISA the student community. In the CESP MA programme .

alone, at least 25 students were offered admission on .

.

maintained that 'the prev'lous pr·ogl'esslvo offer .

system was illega'l and n:rbitnny. Why dicJ the JNUSU the waiting list. So this figure of 2043 includes these 25 .

suddenly decide to :revcnl thQtr 'octuol position' on the day conditional seats and numerous more to bulk up the .

of the UGBM itself instead of rnobllizing students against figure and hide AISA's deceitful polit1cs. .

the new waitfist system to ensure that the progressive Moreover, the functioning ofJNUSU-AJ.SA throughout .

.

admissions policy remained? l11hy did they not even inform the agttation was highly undemocratic, bordering on .

the student community that the progressive admission .

policy, i.e., offersystem was being scrapped bythe dictatorial as was seen during the UGBM. In fact, .

.

neither SFI nor AISA attempted to build a broader .

administration?The next :logical step for JNUSU would have consensus and mobilize students around the crucial .

.

been to initiate a timely and united struggl~ against the issue of reservation. They instead chose to play a game .

administration's moves to do away with the offer system, in of one-upmanship and launched sectarian struggles. .

which they failed miserably. Despite repeated demands for All-Organization and .

The role of AISA-Ied JNUSU: In April after the Supreme Open Meebngs, JNUSU-AISA d1d not pay heed. They .

Court decision to reverse the stay on OBC reservations, called an Emergency Counci! meeting only after the SA .

.

SU launched an agitation to ~sure the implementation had begun their sectarian hunger strike. The AISA-Ied .

of quota in one-go. After a ten-doy hunger strike, the AJ.SA-JNUSU even made a mocl<erv of the L!GBM, the most .

Ied JNUSU came back to the student community with a self-democratic platform and highest decision-making body .

.

proclaimed "great victory" for social justice on campus·. the of the students. They turned it into a site for the .

President to arrogantly display hts questionable .

administration had under student pressure agreed to full .

implementation of 27°/o OBC reservation for the coming "discretionary'' powers. .

year. In May, the administration's empty prom1ses revealed What is more dangerous 1s the thorough internalization .

themselves to be, as usual, empty. by AISA of the language of the anti-reservationist .

.

The JNUSU, apart from informing the student community administration, which was on display during and after about the phased reservation through one poster did the UGBM. One of the resolutions placed by SSS AISA precious little to defend the "victory" of the student councilors was that "177is UGBM holds that there should .

be a united struggle underJNUSU's leadership to .

community. Regressive administrative decisions always ensure the fulfillment of OBC/SC/ST/PH reservation .

come in the summer when most students are not on subject to the availability ofeligible candidates so campus, be it the rustication of students in 2007 or this that the anomalies in the present admission process can year's flawed admission procedure. Yc·t during the agitation be remedied'. It was only after a strong point of order against student rustication, hundrP.df.: of <;tudents protested. raised from the floor that they were forced to remove .

This time as well, JNUSU's re~por,,_,,btllty W[IS to Inform the the 'eligibility' clause. But from what understanding anrl .

student body of the AC's deo~ton, build .s ronr.ensus and position did this dause come? It speaks the same .

mobilize students to take forvmrd tt1c f;trt J(J()I" for full language as the meritocratic YFE and the anti-.

.

'implementation of OBC re5ervCJtlon. :In chno·Jin(J to remain reservationist administration. Which sections was AISA .

silent the JNUSU has endorsed tt1(_t ';eutlli''U uf rcsc!rvatlons .

trying to appease?.

this year and the implementation ()f drrH;t i<~ rx~at cut£. However JNUSU's role was not just Of1 u t.iilent ·.p<·ctutor. Another resolution placed by the AISA SSS Councillors: .

~;U lit1!J G~r ved the " The house holds thatforfulfilling the increased Through 'their campaign AISA·IC(J ;JNUintake in the wake ofOBC reservations, a ·~ Utilt.

administration's purpose of confusin<J mOO;t' r,r u-,t, ~tudcnts properlydefinedoneshotoffermethodshould and convincing some through sptJfiou~ r,It 11lnt It" be workedoutforJNUadmissionsin the.

f~'!'" lnr;tmu tt, 1NUSU.

there has even been a seat Jnttease, .Jlta yt1nr by.

.

t.

calculated the total number of s~att; uffr:if',;;fl ~forthcoming year, keeping in view the due share adding both the first lid: of untondltiUtiallv oiT~rr~d a.aati ofdifferentcategoriesin the admission Jist." .

.

.

.

 

Done