- Akshuna Bakshi
Divya Choudhary
The National Commission for Minority Educational Institution on Tuesday, while declaring the appointment of Valson Thampu, Officer on Special Duty of St. Stephen’s College as “patently illegal� and “inoperative� recommended that Delhi University take “urgent corrective measures� for selection of a regular Principal for the college.
Valson Thampu has been currently in DUTA’s eye of storm for allegedly procuring a fake PhD certificate to secure his position in the college. “Rev. Valson Thampu, the acting principal, St Stephens College, does not possess even the minimum eligibility for the post of principal as demanded by university regulations.� said Dr S. S. Rathi, the chairman of Academics for Development.
Meanwhile, there was a lot of rumpus at St. Stephen’s College on Tuesday during a demonstration organized by the DUTA to protest against “blatant assaultâ€? by Mr. Thampu on academic freedom of teachers. The teachers demonstrated against the showcause notices issued by Thampu to two history lecturers of the college – Tasneem Suhrawardy and Sangeeta Luthra Sharma. Defending his territory, Thampu justified his action and said that the showcause notices were sent only after students complained about the teachers. “I have the complaints on record and I will very soon make them public. So far I had shied away from the media because I did not want to take the matter outside the college,â€? said Thampu
Though Mr. Thampu invited DUTA representatives for talks, DUTA president Aditya Narayan Misra said: “He insisted on talking to a select group of people. We wanted him to speak to the entire DUTA Executive, which he rejected. He did not pay attention to any of our democratic demands, so there could be no discussion.�
On the other hand, Mr. Thampu maintained that the teachers’ body was “never interested in a dialogue�. He said that he had readily agreed to meet the teachers. But then the entire DUTA Executive insisted on meeting him. When he refused to have a discussion with a crowd, they started shouting slogans and created a scene.
All this fomented ire amongst some students and they started opposing the DUTA protests in the college premises. “We don’t have a problem with DUTA staging a protest. But when they entered the college and began sloganeering, we got offended. We felt that the sanctity of our college was being violated,� said Boban Varghese Paul, president of the St. Stephen’s College students’ union.
The DUTA’s next protest action was a protest at the VC office on February 8 to demand the unconditional withdrawal of showcause notices to the two women colleagues at St Stephen’s and also for the appointment of an eligible principal at St Stephen’s as now directed by the NCMEI.
![empty_stadiums[3]](http://dubeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/empty_stadiums31-50x50.jpg "empty_stadiums[3]")
5 comments
Raj Munger says:
Mar 17, 2008
Thampu (acting Principal, St Stephen College) resigned on March 15 2008, since Delhi High Court ordered College to strictly abide to the University Grants Commission (UGC) guidelines on appointing principals. Thampu’s appointment had violated UGC guidelines on at least 4 counts.
The first was that the para 3.5.0 of UGC Regulations dated 04.04.2000 stipulated definite composition of selection committee for appointing Principal was not constituted. Delhi University has already rightly amended its ordinance in the lines of UGC selection committee norms with no exemption to minority institutions as also in UGC norms. On March 12, Delhi HC too has directed college to follow selection process as in UGC norms and not any independent process on its own.
The designation of OSD is an unsanctioned one.
He lacked vital basic degree of Ph.D when he was appointed as OSD. And now he has one but that too is not recognised by UGC.
And lastly, he held three posts, OSD at Stephen and member of College Governing Body and member of National Commission of Minority Educational Institutions.
News reported is that the Stephen’s Management is for fresh appointment as per UGC guidelines. But further violation of selection committee norms will trigger yet another controversy. Even NCMEI in its order citing lack of Ph.D as per University ordinance, also highlighted that VCs panel of atleast 3 members was not formed when Wilson was appointed.
Nandini says:
Mar 31, 2008
Tu-tu Mai-mai over St. Stephen’s Principal continues still. The St. Stephen’s College after taking some disaster management remedial steps on March 15, now is reverting back to its unreasonable illegal ways just to save its egoist concrerns. Its governing body and supreme council have done all to bury the prestigeous character of institution. Recent U turn by college on principal post advertisement has put college into further disgrace. The issue started on Thampu sans Ph.D., is now seems to end on college being questioned for every wrong. Delhi University rightly by letter commanded college to go by stipulated composition of selection committee as in UGC and Delhi Uniiversity norms. issue move in the lightafter over the qualifications required for the post of Principal continues.
Date:29/03/2008 URL: http://www.thehindu.com/2008/03/29/stories/2008032961980300.htm
——————————————————————————–
Back
New Delhi
Wrangling over St. Stephen’s Principal continues
Staff Reporter
NEW DELHI: The tug of war between Delhi University and St. Stephen’s College over the qualifications required for the post of Principal continues.
The “final advertisement� issued by St. Stephen’s College this past week has prompted a communication from the University administration to the college governing body chairman, Bishop S.K. Singh.
The letter written by the Dean of Colleges, Nayanjot Lahiri, on Thursday instructed the governing body to ensure that the composition of the selection committee for the new Principal is done as per the norms of the University Grants Commission regulations that are also incorporated into the ordinances of the University.
With regard to the final advertisement, the missive also highlighted that it was unfortunate on the part of the college administration that it had removed the criterion on applicability of “qualifications/conditions laid out by the UGC/University� as mentioned in the second advertisement.
Also, the other condition of “preferable age� of the potential candidates to be between 50-60 years as specified in the last advertisement was “not in consonance with the UGC regulations as well as University ordinances�.
Hemnath Shah says:
May 2, 2008
The newsitem in “The Hindu, New Delhi” dated 30/04/2008 reporting Thampu’s Ph.D as valid as per recommendations of UGCs expert committee is shocking and surprising. Time and again UGC goes on only to prove to the whole world that it is nothing but U-turns Going Commission. Here I donot want to talk of earlier U-turns but the latest as reported in newsitem below.
Same UGC in Delhi HC submitted that Thampu’s Ph.D is not recognized. Court then adjudicated against Thampu and he was sacked disgracefully. I am no way legitimising his appointment. The point I wish to draw is that it was not Thampu who is at fault. It was Supreme Council and Governing Body of St.Stephen College that violated appointment norms of appointing one sans Ph.D and that too without constituting proper selection committee. Not stopping with that College Management even went on to revoke all his decision after Court’s interim verdict. No doubt that Thampu’s appointment is void-ab-initio (invalid from start) for want of Ph.D at the time of appointment and non-contitution of selection committee of composition as stated in University’s ordinance.
Hemnath Shah says:
May 3, 2008
APPOINTMENT OF COLLEGE TEACHERS & PRINCIPAL
The UGC Regulations 2000 lays down strict and mandatory guidelines regarding the appointment of teachers and principals in universities and colleges with certain prerequisites, one of them being making such appointments by UGC stipulated selection committee composition as per UGC Regulations 2000 para 3.1.0 and 3.5.0 respectively.
Para 3.1.0 composition reads as follows
1. Chairperson of the Governing Body of the College or his/her nominee to be the
Chairperson of the Selection Committee,
2. the Principal of the concerned College,
3. One senior teacher/Head of the Department (of the concerned subject)
preferably having not less that 10 years of services as a teacher,
4. Two nominees of the Vice Chancellor of the affiliating University of whom one
should be a subject expert,
5. Two subject-experts not connected with the college to be nominated by the
Chairperson of the governing body out of a panel of names approved by the Vice Chancellor.
The Principal and Head of the Department should be necessarily included in the Selection Committee. The quorum for the meeting should be five of which at least two must be from out of the three subject experts.
The selection process shall involve assessment of teaching and research aptitude, communication (by group discussion or class lecture demonstration), discussion and analysis ability.
However, few of the defaulters especially the so-called minority colleges under deficit scheme, who under the garb of special privilege continue to flaunt the requirement which shall apply to every university established or incorporated by or under a Central Act, Provincial Act or a State Act, every institution including a constituent or an affiliated college recognized by the Commission. Act adumbrates penal consequences of failure by universities or colleges to comply with recommendations of the Commission, as per provisions of Section 14 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956.
Why is the Central and State Government, Ministry of HRD, UGC turning a blind eye to the said requirement by minority colleges contrary to UGC regulation?
The regulations are mandatory throughout India even if not officially adopted by any university. The sound and legal practice of making appointments by UGC selection committee is not a bottleneck. The obstacle is the unwillingness of college managements in following mandatory regulation. The concept of college management committee is presently outdated and eclipsed in the light of UGC Regulations 2000 (dated 4-4-2000) stipulated selection committee and Mrs.Justice Prabhasridevan Madras High Court too upheld the same in WP 25433/2006 in its judgement dated 12-9-2006. The concept of selection committees vide para 3.1.0 and other paras form integral part of minimum qualifications criteria. Division bench of Madras HC in WA 1322/2006 too upheld UGC selection committee, quashing management committee for selection of teachers.
The essentiality should not be in making illegal appointments but appointment by proper selection procedure more so when funded by public exchequer. The Piling of litigations have exposed the malafide intention of College managements in making money win over merit, inculcating favouritism in such public appointments defying the principles and legality of neutrality and impartiality. The Governments and other watchdogs of higher education must see that only persons appointed by stipulated selection committee along with other requirements get appointed to these institutions as lecturers as they draw salary from the government.
bharath nrayanan says:
May 18, 2008
FORM UNIVERSITY SELECTION COMMITTEE AND HAVE PEACEFUL GOVERNANCE
Close on the heels of 2008-2009 students admissions, there is only one chance for St.Stephen College’s Supreme Council and Governing Body to cure their too chronic a head-ache of Principal appointment.
Management members of St.Stephen College or any minority college for that matter, better need to attend class conducted by Income Tax Department, wherein its men/women (officials) teach the lesson of “Pay proper tax timely and have a peaceful happy sleep�.
For one untruth spoken, one need to defend same by speaking hundreds of falses. Similarly Governing Body of college has put itself into mountain of mistakes for one mistake of appointing an unqualified acting Principal (not holding Ph.D.,). The issue of no Ph.D., has brought to surface many violations -
1. not sending 3 names to VC for the post of OSD.
2. after having set-back at NCMEI and Delhi HC, college decided to go for new Principal but grossly violated in terms of advertisement. Same became contemt of Court.
3. As a remedial measure rectified few irregularities of old advertisement but still patent violations remained.
4. Delhi HC directed it to abide to UGC norms and that outcome of new principal appointment shall be subject to final verdict in the present case but ignoring Principal of res sub judice went to Supreme Court only to have a reverse to Delhi HC.
The objective to approach Supreme Court was get an order that being minority it can appoint Principal by its own method without making University a party to it. But same didnot fructify.
So, now only solution to cover all misddeds is to go by Clause 7(2), Chapter XVIII of DElhi University Ordinance in appointing Principal.
Our Indian Courts even in pasts have took a liberal view of gross misdeeds of Indian Politicians on their pretending as agreeing to not to committ further wrongs and set-right all wrongs.
Similarly even mangement of St.Stephen college will be pardoned for all mistakes, if they appoint regular principal by forming a selection panel as envisaged in para 3.5.0 of UGC Regulation 2000.
It is very simple. Call 2 VCs nominee and fix 3 experts from the list submitted by varsity. Chairman of Governing Body and its one nominee plus 5 of above to sit a fine day and select those who are best available. This committee only can select but not appoint. GB only can appoint one from the shortlisted candidates.
In the full list, GB can even add those who have not applied. It sounds great.
So, enough choices left for College GB. University by norms may even be liberal to leave selection of best from those shortlisted after removing those who are not meritorius.