PaRCha - JNU - All Organisations - 2011 ID-51870
.
.
son. The intentions of the administration now stand thoroughly exposed. It is not surprising that despite intervention .
( by other members of the committee, no positive decision has been reached so far. The coming ~cademlcsession will be the final session for the implementation of 27% OBC reservation with 54% seat increase. The entire student community has to stand up once more to defeat the casteist conspiracy ofthe administration and ensure proper implementation of reservations and seat increase. .
Claims by 'Anti-reservation' Professors: "JNU will not remain world class after reservations" .
As per the December 2005 directive of the MHRD, the UGC issued directives to all universities/colleges/govern-ment aided educational institutes to implement SC/ST reservations in all teaching and non-teaching posts in 2006. Following this directive, JNU passed ratified reservations for faculty in its 230lll and 23111 EC meetings held on 11th April 2007 and 29th September 2007 respectively. Subsequently, some reserved posts were advertised in 2008 and teachers were also appointed. In addition, JNU, in response to a petit1on filed by 'Citizens for Equality' against the directives of MHRD/UGC stated that "we are only implementing the directives ofcentral government and UGC and that reservation .
in faculty posts are not the university's plan. This is binding on the University. (JNU administration's response to writ petition no. 3~ Of 2008). In 2009, university advertised for 149 teaching posts (RC/39/2009) In various newspapers where the university clearly stated t hat as per t he MHRD/UGC directives, SC/ST reservations were being implemented at all posts (Assistant professor/associate professor/professor). .
The recruitment process was on, when some anti-reservat ion professors of the university expressed their dis-pleasure against reservations in the associate professor and professor posts. At the same time, some former Vice chancellors, some professors-emeritus and some present faculty members of JNU sent a letter to the VC in which they 'innocently' expressed concern and displeasure regarding reservations in the posts of associate professor and profes-sor. According to these former Vice Chancello1 s and professors, "If such steps are taken which prevent it (JNU} from .
remaining one ofthe premiere centres ofexcellence (which 1s what we fear will happen by limiting, through reservation, the scope for selecting the bestfaculty at the ~t:mur Professor and Associate Professor levels) the chief victim for will be the disadvantaged sections ofIndian soc1ecy. 1} JNU clt!clltles, the well to do will move to foreign and private universities, and the disad.,·Jntaged will no longer be able lO get world class education which JNU has been proud to offer than so far" (letter dated 12 January 2010). This shocking language exposes the Brahminical mindset of these former Vice chancellors and professors, and reeks of caste1sm. According to them, the academic excellence ofthe university will be 'compromised': all rich students will go abroatl, while the remaining poor students will spoil their future under 'non-meritorious' teachers! .
The JNU administration, which was eagerlv waiting for precisely such an opportunity, Immediately used this 'displeasure' to halt the recruitment pro'.:ess of faculty members (contradicting alilts earlier decisions) and subjected the whole Issue to fresh rounds of 'debate' in the AC and the EC. .
Over the past few years, we have repeatedly seen how the JNU administration has used certain sections of the JNU .
.
faculty, who are well-known for their 1cJeolog1cJI UfJJ.)OSIUon to reservations, in their game plan of scuttling all forms of legally mandated reservations. It is the spunUl.. s, casteist and illogical 'arguments' of this ideologically biased section of the faculty that is being peddled ar all acJmliHStrattve forums including the Academic Council and Execut ive Council. These faculty members are of course entitled tO theie ideological and political positions. However, JNU as an institu-tion cannot allowed to overturn its legal dutie~ of implementation of important constitutional provisions defending social justice because of the whims and ideological prejudices of a few individuals misusing their administrative positions. .
We need to build broad based publiC up1nio11 and strengthen the moJement against this shameful and blatant scuttling of social justice in JNU by the administration. FDIR appeals to the student community to participate in a public meeting tonight (9.30 pm} at Koynn Hostel with several faculty members on the challenges ahead of us to .
implement reservations. .
Forum for Defending nud ln1pJenlenting Reservations (FDIR) .
Rajesh, Shivuni, AbhisiJek, Sandeep Suurav,Puneet, Anoop, Madhulika, Akhilesh, Atif .
t .
.
.
PaRCha - JNU - All Organisations - 2011 ID-51870
.
.
son. The intentions of the administration now stand thoroughly exposed. It is not surprising that despite intervention .
( by other members of the committee, no positive decision has been reached so far. The coming ~cademlcsession will be the final session for the implementation of 27% OBC reservation with 54% seat increase. The entire student community has to stand up once more to defeat the casteist conspiracy ofthe administration and ensure proper implementation of reservations and seat increase. .
Claims by 'Anti-reservation' Professors: "JNU will not remain world class after reservations" .
As per the December 2005 directive of the MHRD, the UGC issued directives to all universities/colleges/govern-ment aided educational institutes to implement SC/ST reservations in all teaching and non-teaching posts in 2006. Following this directive, JNU passed ratified reservations for faculty in its 230lll and 23111 EC meetings held on 11th April 2007 and 29th September 2007 respectively. Subsequently, some reserved posts were advertised in 2008 and teachers were also appointed. In addition, JNU, in response to a petit1on filed by 'Citizens for Equality' against the directives of MHRD/UGC stated that "we are only implementing the directives ofcentral government and UGC and that reservation .
in faculty posts are not the university's plan. This is binding on the University. (JNU administration's response to writ petition no. 3~ Of 2008). In 2009, university advertised for 149 teaching posts (RC/39/2009) In various newspapers where the university clearly stated t hat as per t he MHRD/UGC directives, SC/ST reservations were being implemented at all posts (Assistant professor/associate professor/professor). .
The recruitment process was on, when some anti-reservat ion professors of the university expressed their dis-pleasure against reservations in the associate professor and professor posts. At the same time, some former Vice chancellors, some professors-emeritus and some present faculty members of JNU sent a letter to the VC in which they 'innocently' expressed concern and displeasure regarding reservations in the posts of associate professor and profes-sor. According to these former Vice Chancello1 s and professors, "If such steps are taken which prevent it (JNU} from .
remaining one ofthe premiere centres ofexcellence (which 1s what we fear will happen by limiting, through reservation, the scope for selecting the bestfaculty at the ~t:mur Professor and Associate Professor levels) the chief victim for will be the disadvantaged sections ofIndian soc1ecy. 1} JNU clt!clltles, the well to do will move to foreign and private universities, and the disad.,·Jntaged will no longer be able lO get world class education which JNU has been proud to offer than so far" (letter dated 12 January 2010). This shocking language exposes the Brahminical mindset of these former Vice chancellors and professors, and reeks of caste1sm. According to them, the academic excellence ofthe university will be 'compromised': all rich students will go abroatl, while the remaining poor students will spoil their future under 'non-meritorious' teachers! .
The JNU administration, which was eagerlv waiting for precisely such an opportunity, Immediately used this 'displeasure' to halt the recruitment pro'.:ess of faculty members (contradicting alilts earlier decisions) and subjected the whole Issue to fresh rounds of 'debate' in the AC and the EC. .
Over the past few years, we have repeatedly seen how the JNU administration has used certain sections of the JNU .
.
faculty, who are well-known for their 1cJeolog1cJI UfJJ.)OSIUon to reservations, in their game plan of scuttling all forms of legally mandated reservations. It is the spunUl.. s, casteist and illogical 'arguments' of this ideologically biased section of the faculty that is being peddled ar all acJmliHStrattve forums including the Academic Council and Execut ive Council. These faculty members are of course entitled tO theie ideological and political positions. However, JNU as an institu-tion cannot allowed to overturn its legal dutie~ of implementation of important constitutional provisions defending social justice because of the whims and ideological prejudices of a few individuals misusing their administrative positions. .
We need to build broad based publiC up1nio11 and strengthen the moJement against this shameful and blatant scuttling of social justice in JNU by the administration. FDIR appeals to the student community to participate in a public meeting tonight (9.30 pm} at Koynn Hostel with several faculty members on the challenges ahead of us to .
implement reservations. .
Forum for Defending nud ln1pJenlenting Reservations (FDIR) .
Rajesh, Shivuni, AbhisiJek, Sandeep Suurav,Puneet, Anoop, Madhulika, Akhilesh, Atif .
t .
.
.