PaRCha - JNU - JNUSU - 2006 ID-62264
.
Date: 9.8.08 .
ANOIVIALIES IN JNU ADMISSIONS IMMEDIATELY! .
UNITE lN MASSIVE NUMBERS TO PRESSURIZE THE .JNU ADMlNISTRATION TO CORRECT ALL.
Friends, .
The second informal council meeting of the .JNUSU was held yesterday night over the entire set of.
problems confronting the student community regarding admissions-2008. However, we are once again constrained to inform the student community that in spite of hours of discussion, the JNUSU OfficeBearers are refusing lo accept that there is any seat cut in JNU. Far from agreeing to build pressure upon the JNU Administration in o united manner to urgently toke corrective steps, the JNUSU Office Bearersare satisfied with the odrninistrotion's logic that ther~ has been no seal cut in JNU this year. It is indeed.
disappointing that the Office Bearers do no! hove any concrete facts and figures to substantiate their.
point, but ore choosing to repose their faith entirely in the JNU Administration, contrary to what is .
evident to the student community at large!.
Yesterday. during the informal council meeiing. the Olfice Bearers of the Jf'lUSU offered to lead a joint .
agitation provided we first concede that "intake" should be the basis for all calculations related to .
reservations a'ld seat increase. However, accepting this would mean that we agree to a basis that not .
' only restricts the total number of admissions to JNU to the least possible, bu1 also amounts to a net seat-cut compared to last year, as is already evident in M.Phii/Ph.D admissions. Accepting this would also.
mean that lhe number of students admitted to JNU under the SC/ST, OBC and PH quota would also be.
calculated or the basis of the mrnir.luP1 f1oure: c.f intake and therefore restricted to the lowest possible..
-'.
We corn'-/ agree with the Office Bearers· posilion that fhe 12% OBC quota for this year {which in itself is.
deep11 P ct,en ot1-: since JNU hoo ?4% OBC students in last year's odmissiol'ls) and 3% PH quota should be fulftlr-3 J ·:) 1 n e besis :::>t 'intakE · R)tile·, t! c:: Lcsts r::·f all calculations should be 'offer', which has been1he case i'l Jt JU ;cr se\·erol da.::ades. so rnor 'hs· moximum numbers of students are able to join JNUunder oil ca:egonr:;s Accusing us of ~aki,1r::i on illegal position is not only a completely fabricated and .
hJllo"'-crorqe, bJT is also based on absolute ignorance about how admissrons have been held in JNU for several decac..es. Hod aomiss1ons based ')'I thf' 'offer' system been illegal, then all admissions in JNU till last year 11'"\Ciuding !hose under SC/ST and PY quota (which were all calculated on the basis of 'offer') .
would have been rendered illegal!.
We are also surprised by the Office BParer's accusation yesterday that we were silent for a long time .
and chose to de!iberately delay bringing all matters concerned with admissions to light. On the contrary ' .
it is the Office Bearers who agreed to all sorts of anti-student logic peddled by t11e JNU Administration in .
the Academic Council and in subsequent mee1ings of the Standing Committee on Admissions {where .
only Office Bearer's are allowed to attend on behalf of the JNUSU} and failed to inform the student community about major anti-stddent changes brought about in the basis and process of admissions.Thanks to !heir abject surrender, admissions to JNU have been held under a shroud of unprecedentedmystery and lack of transparency. Arbitrary procedures have resulted in multiple standards in the admission process -intake-offer for BA, waiting lists for other programmes, no waiting list for MA Urdu.
etc. As soon as v.te received feedback from the students from the various Schools and Centres aboutseat cuts, we informed the student community and simul1aneously requisitioned an immediate Council Meeting of t·he JNUSU to discuss ond decide upor, this urgent matter. An informal Council meeting wasthe Councillors of the JNUSU be blamed for 1he irresponsibility of the Office Bearers? .
held on 3rd August 2008. But the Office Bearers chose 1o dismiss all our concerns as baseless. How can.
We are also surprised by ·the labored a11emp1s by i·he JNUSU Office Bearers to confuse the students.
regarding our position on seai cuts. We are not changing our position between 'offer' and joined. Our .
position is very clear-that the JNU Adminis1ration and the JNUSU Office Bearers have already decided.
to implemenl only 12% OBC reservation and 18% sea1 increase this year, inslead of 27% OBC reservation.
in one go and 54% seat increase which had been agreed between the JNU Administration and lastyear's JNUSU. While maintaining cur opposition to the compromised formula of 12% OBC reservation .
p. To() .
.
PaRCha - JNU - JNUSU - 2006 ID-62264
.
Date: 9.8.08 .
ANOIVIALIES IN JNU ADMISSIONS IMMEDIATELY! .
UNITE lN MASSIVE NUMBERS TO PRESSURIZE THE .JNU ADMlNISTRATION TO CORRECT ALL.
Friends, .
The second informal council meeting of the .JNUSU was held yesterday night over the entire set of.
problems confronting the student community regarding admissions-2008. However, we are once again constrained to inform the student community that in spite of hours of discussion, the JNUSU OfficeBearers are refusing lo accept that there is any seat cut in JNU. Far from agreeing to build pressure upon the JNU Administration in o united manner to urgently toke corrective steps, the JNUSU Office Bearersare satisfied with the odrninistrotion's logic that ther~ has been no seal cut in JNU this year. It is indeed.
disappointing that the Office Bearers do no! hove any concrete facts and figures to substantiate their.
point, but ore choosing to repose their faith entirely in the JNU Administration, contrary to what is .
evident to the student community at large!.
Yesterday. during the informal council meeiing. the Olfice Bearers of the Jf'lUSU offered to lead a joint .
agitation provided we first concede that "intake" should be the basis for all calculations related to .
reservations a'ld seat increase. However, accepting this would mean that we agree to a basis that not .
' only restricts the total number of admissions to JNU to the least possible, bu1 also amounts to a net seat-cut compared to last year, as is already evident in M.Phii/Ph.D admissions. Accepting this would also.
mean that lhe number of students admitted to JNU under the SC/ST, OBC and PH quota would also be.
calculated or the basis of the mrnir.luP1 f1oure: c.f intake and therefore restricted to the lowest possible..
-'.
We corn'-/ agree with the Office Bearers· posilion that fhe 12% OBC quota for this year {which in itself is.
deep11 P ct,en ot1-: since JNU hoo ?4% OBC students in last year's odmissiol'ls) and 3% PH quota should be fulftlr-3 J ·:) 1 n e besis :::>t 'intakE · R)tile·, t! c:: Lcsts r::·f all calculations should be 'offer', which has been1he case i'l Jt JU ;cr se\·erol da.::ades. so rnor 'hs· moximum numbers of students are able to join JNUunder oil ca:egonr:;s Accusing us of ~aki,1r::i on illegal position is not only a completely fabricated and .
hJllo"'-crorqe, bJT is also based on absolute ignorance about how admissrons have been held in JNU for several decac..es. Hod aomiss1ons based ')'I thf' 'offer' system been illegal, then all admissions in JNU till last year 11'"\Ciuding !hose under SC/ST and PY quota (which were all calculated on the basis of 'offer') .
would have been rendered illegal!.
We are also surprised by the Office BParer's accusation yesterday that we were silent for a long time .
and chose to de!iberately delay bringing all matters concerned with admissions to light. On the contrary ' .
it is the Office Bearers who agreed to all sorts of anti-student logic peddled by t11e JNU Administration in .
the Academic Council and in subsequent mee1ings of the Standing Committee on Admissions {where .
only Office Bearer's are allowed to attend on behalf of the JNUSU} and failed to inform the student community about major anti-stddent changes brought about in the basis and process of admissions.Thanks to !heir abject surrender, admissions to JNU have been held under a shroud of unprecedentedmystery and lack of transparency. Arbitrary procedures have resulted in multiple standards in the admission process -intake-offer for BA, waiting lists for other programmes, no waiting list for MA Urdu.
etc. As soon as v.te received feedback from the students from the various Schools and Centres aboutseat cuts, we informed the student community and simul1aneously requisitioned an immediate Council Meeting of t·he JNUSU to discuss ond decide upor, this urgent matter. An informal Council meeting wasthe Councillors of the JNUSU be blamed for 1he irresponsibility of the Office Bearers? .
held on 3rd August 2008. But the Office Bearers chose 1o dismiss all our concerns as baseless. How can.
We are also surprised by ·the labored a11emp1s by i·he JNUSU Office Bearers to confuse the students.
regarding our position on seai cuts. We are not changing our position between 'offer' and joined. Our .
position is very clear-that the JNU Adminis1ration and the JNUSU Office Bearers have already decided.
to implemenl only 12% OBC reservation and 18% sea1 increase this year, inslead of 27% OBC reservation.
in one go and 54% seat increase which had been agreed between the JNU Administration and lastyear's JNUSU. While maintaining cur opposition to the compromised formula of 12% OBC reservation .
p. To() .
.