In the elections of the Delhi University Teachers’ Association (DUTA) held on 25 August 2011, DTF candidate Amar Deo Sharma was elected President with 2417 votes and a margin of 524 votes. Three DTF candidates for the DUTA Executive – Abha Dev Habib, Giriraj Bairwa and Saikat Ghosh – were also elected.

The DTF thanks teachers for this forthright and unequivocal expression of faith and assures them that it will strive to forge a united movement to meet the grave challenges facing the University system and teachers’ service conditions.

The massive victory of the DTF is an expression of the recognition by teachers of the urgency to resist Government Policies towards higher education. The policies aim at laying down a legal framework for commercialising higher education to facilitate private business through (i) a plethora of bills being proposed by the MHRD, (ii) ongoing forced academic restructuring of public funded universities and colleges with no regard for quality and equity, and (iii) instituting an irrational promotion policy designed to create multiple hierarchies and to deny promotion in order to keep the general level of salary down and make teachers subservient to the administration, to accept whatever they are told without questioning the wisdom or the propriety of changes they are asked to carry out.

The protégées of the Government occupying high positions in the University administration are vitiating the functioning of academic institutions through systematic arm-twisting, arbitrary and non-transparent functioning, and rewarding sycophancy and penalising dissent. Moves to discredit and assault collective actions through unions/ associations and destroying practices of widest consultations and involvement in academic decisions are the other steps which are being systematically deployed.

In the context of Delhi University, the teachers have expressed their faith in the left and democratic forces and entrusted to the DTF the responsibility to forge a united resistance.

Elect Amar Deo Sharma as DUTA President
.

On 25 August (Thursday, 10 am to 5 pm) we have to decide whether we want a DUTA that will be ready to confront the University administration and Government or one that remains inert and silent before the assault from these authorities. We have to choose between the committed politics of mass mobilisation and the corrupt politics of backroom deals with “achievements” that curiously appear only during elections. As we witness and feel the widespread anger generated against corruption and the anti-democratic crackdown by the Government to contain it, we must ask ourselves whether we wish to draw inspiration from this remarkable popular mobilisation or whether we will succumb to the lack of will to fight which has been the hallmark of the AAD-led DUTA.

What have we achieved with the AAD-led DUTA’s aversion for struggle?

• Except for a handful of interviews the appointment process has been stalled for almost a year by withholding the list of experts. The VC’s public statement that appointments would be frozen for three years in view of workload changes due to the semester system has gone without a protest from the DUTA.
• The provision in the UGC Regulations 2009 for counting total years of service for promotion at every stage, instead of the minimum years in each feeder grade, has been withdrawn in the revised UGC Regulations 2010. This will adversely affect all teachers with ad hoc service since this service will not be counted except for the first upward movement from AGP 6000 to AGP 7000.
• The provision of advance increments at entry for teachers with MPhil/PhD has never explicitly excluded ad hoc teachers even in past pay revisions. If today the longstanding demand of the DUTA to extend this benefit to ad hoc teachers has been realised, the DUTA leadership should have written to the University and all Principals to implement it and to Staff Associations to ensure compliance. Instead the AAD is surreptitiously circulating signature sheets among ad-hoc teachers as part of its election campaign.
• Even as the case filed by the DUTA on the semester system is on, the DUTA leadership has struck a deal to allow its introduction in all courses. This became evident in the last two AC meetings when their members, instead of dissenting, approved the adoption of courses and ratification of illegalities. With this approval, many ad hoc teachers have lost their jobs due to the imbalanced workload or face such losses in the coming semesters.
• The DUTA leadership has refused to conduct any struggle on the point system and other adverse service conditions despite requisitions of the DUTA Executive and repeated appeals to mobilise mass protests. The DUTA President was given a second term as FEDCUTA President with the expectation that he would organise such protests. His refusal has resulted in several Central Universities moving ahead with the implementation of the point system.

The AAD leadership has demonstrated its unwillingness to fight adverse changes in service conditions and academic structures. These changes are part of the Government policy of commercialising higher education, which requires downsizing of collective and individual rights of dissent and protest.

Defeat the politics of appeasing the authorities
.

The cynicism of the Government personified in Kapil Sibal has been exposed during the anti-corruption struggle. It is at his behest that the present Vice-Chancellor has outdone his predecessor in forcing through shoddy changes in academic programmes. The AAD-led DUTA values its backdoor contact with Mr. Sibal more than the need to challenge Government policy. It values keeping the VC in good humour more than the struggle against his anti-academic and anti-democratic actions.

Revive the DUTA – Vote DTF
.

The Need of the Hour

To successfully fight back, we must reverse the process of reducing the DUTA to a body that seeks small favours by appeasing the authorities. The DUTA is our collective instrument of struggle. The retreat of the DUTA leadership from its responsibility compelled individual teachers to come together as JAB. By wrongfully calling the JAB an outfit of a particular political group, the AAD seeks to divert attention from its own abdication of responsibility.

A DUTA committed to this struggle will have to reach out to students and the people at large, it will have to mobilise the media, popularise its arguments and launch mass actions. It must initiate and join with other unions and movements in larger collective actions. It is only through such multi-pronged efforts that we can hope to resist the Government’s policy assault on the university system and teachers’ service conditions. Our success in reaching out to students and other sections of society will also require earnest and systematic efforts to improve our own accountability.

A sustained struggle against Government policy is both required and possible. Many such struggles were successfully carried out in the past when the DTF was in the leadership of the DUTA. The present wave of popular protests against corruption also inspires us to intensify resistance to the policy assault.

This election will decide whether we can revive the fighting tradition of the DUTA. We appeal to teachers to participate in large numbers and vote decisively. Let us send a signal to the authorities that the teachers of Delhi University are ready to take them on.

Elect
. 

Amar Deo Sharma

Dept of Hindi, Delhi College of Arts & Commerce
Ph: 9868173032, 9560826961

as DUTA President

and

Abha Dev Habib

Dept of Physics, Miranda House
Ph: 9818383074

Anil Kumar

Dept of Hindi, Moti Lal Nehru College
Ph: 9868264503

Giriraj Bairwa

Dept of Political Science, Rajdhani College
Ph: 9818466999

Saikat Ghosh

Dept of English, SGTB Khalsa College
Ph: 9910091754

to the DUTA Executive

…

It is a victory for democracy that the Congress Government has made a volte-face and failed in in its authoritarian crackdown on peaceful protest. The crackdown, reminiscent of the days of Emergency, sought to redefine democracy; the volte-face gives immense hope that when people stand up in defense of democratic rights and against wrong policies, authoritarianism can be defeated. This historic occasion has to be seized to actualize effective institutional mechanisms to curb corruption at all levels and in all spheres through popular and determined protest actions.

The authoritarianism of the Congress Government emanates from its anti-people policies. The lack of political will to confront corruption is related to the coalescence of dominant political and business interests.

It is this coalescence that seeks to commercialise public funded higher education, impervious to its disastrous effect on equity, quality and independent thinking, only in order to facilitate profitability for private education business, domestic and foreign. This policy of commercialization of public institutions and privatisation of the higher education sector is at the root of a disastrous restructuring of academic programmes and institutions as well as teachers’ role in determining the contour and character of education and their service conditions.

The cynicism of the Government personified in Kapil Sibal has been exposed during the anti-corruption struggle. While, at the behest of the MHRD, the present Vice-Chancellor of the Delhi University has outdone his predecessor in forcing through changes in academic programmes without allowing academic debate and dissent, Kapil Sibal refuses to intervene, ironically, citing his alleged respect for University autonomy exactly the same way as he respected the autonomy of the Delhi Police in laying down conditions for protest against corruption. The present wave of protests gives us strength to intensify resistance to the Government policy towards education. A sustained struggle against Government policy is both required and possible. We are sure that the media will not uncritically accept duplicitous, vacuous and diversionary pretensions of the Government on policy issues and facilitate a debate on the serious issues involved.

चलो कि लम्बा है सफर

कुरते के फड़फड़ाते छोर
जैसे ताल मिलाते हों
सीने में धड़कते
दिल के साथ साथ
कि ये जो आदमी है
इसके जोश के लिये
कई और चाहिये दिल
फड़कती बाज़ुओं
और दौड़ते कदमों को
खून की आपूर्ति के लिये
कि ये कभी रुकता ही नहीं
खटखटाता ही रहता है
दरवाजे दीवारें दिमाग
हमारे सम्मान के लिये
और वो गुस्सा
जो उठता ही रहता है
तोड़ता ही रहता है
हड्डियाँ सुपारी की
पीसता ही रहता है
नसें कथ्थे की

चलो कि इस सीने में
और जोश भर दें
चलो कि इन बाज़ुओं को
और बाज़ुओं की ताकत दे दें
चलो कि बड़ा लम्बा है
अमर का सफर

- संजीव कौशल

Vote DTF

Elect Amar Deo Sharma as DUTA President

..

..

डूटा में फिर जान फूंकिये

पिछले छह महीनों से डूटा गहन चिकित्सा कक्ष (ICU) में है - वही डूटा जिसका इतिहास जुझारू संघर्षों और बेमिसाल उपलबिधयों की दास्तानों से भरा पड़ा है और जिसके ऊपर पिछले कई दशकों से हिंदुस्तान के शिक्षक आंदोलन की अगुवाई का दारोमदार रहा है। आज अगर उसका नेतृत्व शिक्षक हितों की हिफ़ाज़त के अपने बुनियादी संकल्प को ताक पर रखकर हुक्मरानों को खुली छूट देने का हिमायती बन गया है, तो यह हमारी संघ-शकित के मृत्युशैया पर होने का लक्षण नहीं तो और क्या है! निस्संदेह, 25 अगस्त का मतदान वह सही अवसर होगा जब हम अपनी डूटा को बचाने की सबसे संज़ीदा और नतीजाख़ेज़ कोशिश कर सकते हैं।

चली है रस्म कि कोई न सिर उठा के चले

नवउदारवादी एजेंडे को थोपने के मामले में केंद्र सरकार से लेकर दिल्ली विश्वविधालय के हाकिम-हुक्काम तक का रवैया पिछले सालों में कितना आक्रामक रहा है, हम सब इसके गवाह हैं। उनकी साफ़ समझ है कि क्या पढ़ाया जायेगा, कैसे पढ़ाया जायेगा, किन हालात में पढ़ाया जायेगा और किस मक़सद से पढ़ाया जायेगा - यह तय करना उनका काम है, हम शिक्षकों का नहीं। शिक्षक वह वेतनभोगी कर्मचारी है जिसे अपनी दिहाड़ी के बदले इन तयशुदा बातों पर अमल भर करना है। नीतिगत फ़ैसलों की प्रक्रिया में अपनी भागीदारी का दावा पेश करता शिक्षक एक लंबे अर्से से उनकी आंखों की किरकिरी बना रहा है। जब-जब हम शिक्षकों ने सम्मानजनक सेवा-शर्तों की लड़ाइयां जीतीं, जब-जब हमने शिक्षा को बाज़ार की ताक़तों के हवाले करने का तीखा विरोध किया, जब-जब हमने शिक्षण-अधिगम यानी सिखाने-सीखने की प्रक्रिया का स्तर गिरानेवाली नवउदारवादी पहलक़दमियों का मुंहतोड़ जवाब दिया, तब-तब इन हुक्मरानों को हमारी बौद्धिक और सांगठनिक ताक़त नागवार गुज़री। वे बहुराष्ट्रीय कंपनियों और अपने देश के बड़े पूंजीपति घरानों को शिक्षा के क्षेत्र में खरबों का व्यापार पसारने की जगह मुहैया कराना चाहते हैं और इसके लिए विश्वविधालयों को सेवाप्रदाता कंपनियों में, विधार्थियों को उपभोक्ताओं में और शिक्षकों को ठेके पर काम करने वाले विशेषज्ञ टिप्पणीकारों में तब्दील कर देना चाहते हैं। ज़ाहिर है, हर निर्णायक अवसर पर हमारी ताक़त को उन्होंने इस तब्दीली के रास्ते की सबसे बड़ी अड़चन के रूप में देखा। आख़िरकार, सेमेस्टर को थोपने के मौक़े पर उन्होंने तय कर लिया कि अब इस ताक़त को ज़ोर-आज़माइश के अखाड़े से ही बाहर कर दिया जाना चाहिए। उन्होंने यह सुनिशिचत किया कि किसी भी मंच पर ‘बहस‘ नाम की बला को जगह न मिलने पाये, वर्ना इन शिक्षकों की बौद्धिक ताक़त बाज़ी मार ले जायेगी। उन्होंने यह सुनिशिचत किया कि व्यावहारिक क्रियान्वयन में डूटा की आवाज़ के लिए कोई झरोखा न खुलने पाये, वर्ना इन शिक्षकों की सांगठनिक ताक़त बाज़ी मार ले जायेगी। ये दोनों चीज़ें उन्होंने कैसे सुनिशिचत कीं, हम सब जानते हैं। उनसे यही उम्मीद भी थी।

पर डूटा नेतृत्व से यह उम्मीद नहीं थी कि अदालती आदेशों की आड़ में वह हुक्मरानों की इस चाल का मोहरा बना जायेगा। सेमेस्टर-विरोधी आंदोलन की शुरुआत डूटा नेतृत्व ने थोड़े बेमन से और थोड़ी देर से ज़रूर की थी, लेकिन जिस तरह की एकजुटता के साथ यह आंदोलन आगे बढ़ा था, उसे देखते हुए क़दम पीछे खींचने का यह तजुर्बा एक सदमे की तरह था। शिक्षकों को धमकाया जाता रहा और ग़लत नियमों के हवाले से उन्हें ‘कारण बताओ‘ नोटिसें जारी होती रहीं, विभागाध्यक्षों और प्राचार्यों को रजिस्ट्रार की ओर से अनाप-शनाप ख़त भेजे जाते रहे, विश्वविधालय प्रशासन रोज़-ब-रोज़ नियमों की धज्जियां उड़ाता रहा, पर हमारी डूटा अदालती आदेश की आड़ में ख़ामोश बैठी रही। प्रशासन अगर नियमों का ग़लत तरीके से हवाला दे रहा था, तो डूटा अदालती आदेश का ग़लत तरीके से हवाला दे रही थी। नये कुलपति के साथ चाय-संध्या क्या मनायी गयी, डूटा ने स्थायी तौर पर उस आदेश की ओट में जाकर लुप्त-गुप्त हो जाने का रास्ता चुन लिया। डूटा के नेतृत्वकारी ग्रुप ए.ए.डी. पर चाय का यह संक्रामक प्रभाव बहुतों के लिए एक झटके की तरह था। शिक्षक और शिक्षा का सुरक्षा-कवच बनने की बजाय इस ग्रुप ने ओ.एस.डी. समेत विभिन्न तरह के पदों के लिए नियुक्ति-पत्र बांटने की खिड़की बनना पसंद किया। इस तरह उसने अपनी प्राथमिकताओं को बेनक़ाब कर दिया। तभी तो उसे इस अंतर्विरोध की भी परवाह नहीं रही कि जिस सेमेस्टर के विरोध में डूटा अदालत में मुकदमा लड़ रही है, उसी से जुड़े पाठयक्रमों पर ए.सी. तथा इ.सी. में ए.ए.डी. के लोगों ने अपनी कोई असहमति दर्ज नहीं करवायी और इस तरह उन निर्णयों के भागीदार बनने की ऐतिहासिक निर्लज्जता का प्रदर्शन किया (ए.सी. में प्रस्तावित पाठयक्रमों पर डी.टी.एफ़. से जुड़े चार सदस्यों समेत कुल छह ने असहमति दर्ज करवायी)।

हमको रहना है पे यूं ही तो नहीं रहना है

डूटा कई दशकों से इस देश का सबसे शकितशाली और ज़िम्मेदार शिक्षक संघ रहा है। उसने बड़ी-बड़ी लड़ाइयां जीती हैं जिनका फ़ायदा पूरे देश के शिक्षक-समुदाय को मिला है। आज डूटा के गौरवशाली दिनों को याद करना ज़रूरी है; सिर्फ़ इसलिए नहीं कि वर्तमान डूटा नेतृत्व की कमज़ोरी से उपजनेवाली मायूसी को झटक देने के लिए हम मन को यह समझा सकें कि जाते-जाते यूं ही पल भर को ख़िज़ां ठहरी है, बल्कि इसलिए भी कि शिक्षा के व्यावसायीकरण और निजीकरण के लिए कटिबद्ध सरकार के पिटारे में अभी अनगिनत चीज़ें बाहर आने की अपनी बारी का इंतज़ार कर रही हैं। उच्च शिक्षा पर छह बिल संसद में पेश होने जा रहे हैं जिनका पूरा फ़ोकस शिक्षा को बिकाऊ माल में तब्दील करने पर है। इनसे आर-पार की लड़ाई हमें लड़नी ही होगी। पर हालत ये है कि नेतृत्व की कमज़ोरी के चलते हम अभी पीछे से चली आती कारस्तानियों को भी चुनौती नहीं दे पाये हैं। प्रोन्नति के लिए बने हुए बेढब प्वाइंट सिस्टम के ख़िलाफ़ लड़ाई अभी तक शुरू ही नहीं की गयी है। हम जानते हैं कि पी.बी.ए.एस. का यह नक़्शा जहां ज़्यादातर शिक्षकों को असोसिएट प्रोफ़ेसर बनने से रोकने का बहाना है, वहीं उन्हें आज्ञाकारी और पालतू बनाने का ज़रिया भी है, क्योंकि हमारे स्कोर का एक बड़ा हिस्सा प्राचार्यों और ऐसे ही विशेषज्ञों की कृपा पर निर्भर होगा। क्या इस साज़िश के ख़िलाफ़ एक निर्णायक संघर्ष छेड़ने की ज़रूरत नहीं है? सेमेस्टराइज़ेशन के बहाने स्थायी नियुकितयों को टालते जाने का प्रशासन का रवैया हमारे समुदाय के एक बड़े हिस्से के लिए दु:स्वप्न की तरह हो गया है। चार-चार महीने के अनुबंध पर काम करनेवाले ये साथी सालाना वेतनवृद्धि से लेकर चिकित्सा-सुविधाओं तक - हर चीज़ से वंचित हैं; मैटर्निटी लीव की तो बात ही क्या। क्या स्थायी नियुकितयों के लगातार टलते जाने की सूरत में तदर्थ शिक्षकों-शिक्षिकाओं को ये सारी सुविधाएं दिलाने की लड़ार्इ नहीं लड़ाई नहीं लड़ी जानी चाहिए?

ऐसे दसियों मुद्दॆ और सवाल हैं जिनसे आज दिल्ली विश्वविधालय का आम शिक्षक रू-ब-रू है।

आइये, एक जुझारू डूटा बनायें और मुक़ाबला जारी रखें।
.

अध्यक्ष पद के लिए.
..

अमर देव शर्मा

हिंदी विभाग, दिल्ली कालेज आफ़ आर्टस ऐंड कामर्स, फ़ोन: 9868173032, 9560826961

कार्यकारिणी के लिए

आभा देव हबीब

भौतिकी विभाग, मिरांडा हाउस, फ़ोन: 9818383074

गिरिराज बैरवा

राजनीतिशास्त्र विभाग, राजधानी कालेज, फ़ोन: 9818466999

अनिल कुमार

हिंदी विभाग, मोतीलाल नेहरू कालेज, फ़ोन: 9868264503

सैकत घोष

अंग्रेज़ी विभाग, एस.जी.टी.बी.खालसा कालेज, फ़ोन: 9910091754

Circular 1 – Re: EC Resolution on fixation / redesignation of Readers / Lecturers (Selection Grade)

Circular 2 – Re: EC Resolution No. 153 on promotion of Lecturers / Lecturers in Senior Scale who became eligible up to 30 June 2010

Elect Amar Deo Sharma as DUTA President

On 25.8.2011 teachers will decide the future of the DUTA. As we look back on the past two years of bitter struggle and its fate, let us recall the significance of this collective body of teachers.

The DUTA, in its history of more than four decades, fought and won big battles to improve our service conditions and to democratise the functioning of the University and colleges. It won us the right to promotion, Staff Councils, rotation of Headship, elected representation in the AC, EC and governing bodies. It fought against harassment of temporary/ ad hoc teachers and for the dignity of senior teachers approaching retirement. And it firmly resisted many policy assaults by successive governments that threatened to erode our hard won rights and democratic academic environment.

Today such assaults are being intensified many times over. Six bills await approval of Parliament that aim at drastic changes in the landscape of universities and colleges through aggressive marketisation of higher education and authoritarian measures to overcome resistance (see next page). Semesterisation and the points based system of denying promotion are part and parcel of this policy assault. Shall we be cowed down or shall we fight back? And with what kind of DUTA leadership can we fight back?

Over the course of the past two years, we have seen an unprecedented united struggle by teachers on the issue of semester system, but under an unwilling DUTA leadership. With its Congress affiliation, this AAD-leadership had no will to fight. It tried to ward off the struggle until it was forced by the collective will of the teachers to play its role. And it withdrew into a shell using the Court order of November 2010 as a pretext. It’s withdrawal was so complete that it watched in silence as the new University administration outdid even its predecessor in disregarding statutory provisions, throwing all norms and propriety to the winds, and vindictively targeting teachers who were seen as part of the movement of resistance. The DUTA did not protest when some teachers of the Department of English were issued show cause notices as to why their resigning from sub-committees of the Departmental Council should not be considered as being on ‘strike’; it did not raise any question when intimidating orders were issued by the Registrar to Heads and Principals demanding their compliance in enforcing shocking measures against their own colleagues.

With the DUTA’s retreat from all responsibility, teachers felt compelled to keep resistance alive through the Joint Action Body (JAB), bringing with their untiring efforts public recognition in the media of the grave issues involved in semesterisation.

Emboldened by the DUTA’s silence, however, the University administration has made arbitrary diktats its preferred style of functioning. The admission fiasco with its grievous consequences for the teaching-learning process is only the most recent example. The administration’s arrogance has been doubly fortified by the concurrent silence of the Congress-led AAD and the BJP-led NDTF and their unwillingness to even express dissent in the AC/EC.

The DUTA leadership has been similarly unwilling to confront the Government on adverse changes in service conditions. If teachers are denied promotion through impassable, academically absurd hurdles (PBAS), then all claims by the Government of having improved the service conditions of the profession come to naught. These conditionalities, coming as part of the policy assault to facilitate the corporatisation of universities, cannot be resisted without the determination to fight this assault. The DUTA leadership with its rhetoric of negotiations has scorned all appeals to organise collective resistance. This was also its approach when the Delhi College of Engineering was rudely dismembered from the Delhi University. A similar fate can befall other colleges if the policy of autonomous colleges is not resisted.

The DTF has a long tradition of leading the DUTA in historic struggles. It has played its role when in leadership and when not, but the history of the DUTA shows that only the DTF has the will, commitment and ability to organise effective struggles to fight back such policy assaults. We appeal to teachers: Revive the DUTA – Vote DTF.

Six Bills on Higher Education before Parliament

• Foreign Educational Institutions Bill: allows foreign institutions to sell higher education degrees to those who pay the highest price (read fees) and minimise costs (e.g. teachers salaries).
• Prohibition of Unfair Practices Bill: without defining “unfair practice” aims to keep activities of private educational institutions (e.g teachers’ service conditions and promotions) outside the purview of judicial scrutiny
• Educational Tribunal Bill: denies all stakeholders (e.g. teachers, students, employees) the constitutional right to go to High courts or Supreme Court to seek justice and is thus tailored to private and foreign institutions
• Universities for Innovation Bill: allows the setting up of private universities with public funding in the name of “innovation” with absolute powers for private promoters without any government regulation
• Higher Education and Research Bill: replaces the UGC with the National Commission for Higher Education and Research with powers to decide every aspect of higher education – teaching, learning, curriculum, service conditions, funding, appointments, creation of universities – leaving educational institutions with no autonomy.
• National Accreditation Regulatory Authority Bill: provides for mandatory accreditation for Indian institutions and exemption from it to a class of institutions at the whims and fancies of central government.

All the six bills aim at making education into a commodity where the “usual rules of business” apply.

Adverse Changes in Service Conditions

• Just as semesterisation is the first step towards dismembering and corporatising the University, the Performance Based Appraisal System (PBAS) – with promotion made conditional to points accrued in API scores – paves the way for differential pay-scales linked to the market-value of each discipline: some disciplines will provide more opportunities to collect the required scores than others.

• This system aims at denying/ delaying promotion with its insistence on (i) a separate minimum score for research (publications, conferences, etc); (ii) a minimum score for the assessment period as well as a minimum annual score, which is not possible during any kind of long leave; (iii) at least 50% in the “expert assessment”. Promotion to Associate Professor has been made into a hurdle difficult for most teachers to cross.

• Promotion to Professor in colleges is made well-nigh impossible by the 10% quota (including 25% recruitment from outside) and enhanced API scores.

• The 10% quota at AGP 12000 and the fresh selection procedure is a similar hurdle introduced to deny upward movement to Professors.

• Parity of Librarians with teachers is denied in promotion and age of retirement. Disparities have also been created between directly recruited Deputy Librarians and College Librarians/ Asst Librarians in the University.

• The already deeply hierarchical conception of the new pay structure has been further compounded by arbitrariness in UGC fixation rules, for eg.: (i) Senior Lecturers promoted before 1.1.2006 were placed at 18600+AGP 7000, whereas those promoted from 1.1.2006 onwards have been placed at 15600+AGP 7000; (ii) fixation of incumbent Professors fell to more than Rs.2000 below the Rs.43000 starting pay for those recruited after 1.1.2006.

• The University has added to this arbitrariness by (i) downgrading appointments of Associate Professors to “Readers/Assistant Professors with AGP 8000”; (ii) appointing Assistant Professors from 2008 directly with AGP 7000 or 8000 while those appointed from 2006 to 2008 were placed at AGP 6000.

• Denial of Transport Allowance during Study and Sabbatical Leave defies all academic logic.

• For those who were Readers as on 1.1.2006, the required years of service for promotion to Professor should be six years including their past experience as Readers/ in Reader’s grade.

• The UGC Anomalies Committee report has been finally submitted but still not made public. It remains to be seen what amendments have been proposed.

Semester System and other ‘reforms’

The court orders since the PIL in October 2010 were used by the DU administration to implement the semester system in an unacademic manner.

In the AC meetings held on 25 April and 8 July 2011, ill-prepared and partial courses were passed without feedback from colleges or peer review. Important issues, raised by the Faculty of Social Sciences and other interventions, went unheard. Semesterisation and the New Admission Policy are aimed at showing that mismanagement is due to the size of University and that fragmentation is inevitable. Centralised evaluation and the proposed assembly line evaluation (one question per teacher) by a board of examiners are other such ‘reforms’.

We are not alone in facing such ‘reforms’ flowing from current neoliberal policies. Today resistance is increasing across the globe against such changes. The task ahead for a responsible teachers’ organisation is to organize collective resistance through reasoned argument and mass action. We must continue our fight against this ill-devised change which will downgrade the quality of teaching-learning and work against students from disadvantaged backgrounds.

The DTF stands committed to reorganize resistance against the semester system through debate and discussion and by involving other sections of the universities and civil society.

The issue of the semester system is before the High Court in the form of two writ petitions, one filed by the DUTA and another by 9 teachers, and an intervention in support of these petitions filed by seven students. These are being argued by V. K. Rao, Colin Gonzalves and Prashant Bhushan respectively. Hearings took place on 12 and 19 July. The next hearing is on 1 August.

Other issues before us

• Accountability of Authorities: Mechanisms for accountability of authorities are urgently needed to check the growing arbitrary functioning and violations of due processes.

• Appointments: Though posts created on account of 54% OBC expansion are still lying vacant, the DU administration is refusing to fill them.

• Ad-hoc appointments: The provision of interview after every four months has added to teachers’ insecurity and adversely affected students through frequent changes in teachers. The semester system has resulted in loss of jobs and short-term vacanies.

• Pension: Teachers left under the CPF scheme must be allowed to switch to GPF. Those who opted only after 30.9.1987 should be deemed to be in GPF as directed as per the GOI order and directions by the High Court and Supreme Court.

• All teachers appointed since 1.1.2004 face a New Pension Scheme that does not assure pension. The DUTA must join all other unions in demanding an assured pension scheme and withdrawal of the PFRDA Bill.

• Ensure Parity: Librarians should be redesignated as Assistant Professors, Associate Professors and Professors in Library Education.

• Parity with teachers must be extended to Instructors, the academic staff of the Hindi Implementation Board and System Programmers.

• OBC expansion: Infrastructure needed to ensure quality teaching-learning processes is still not in place. A mechanism to ensure proper utilisation of funds is needed.

• Reservation: In violation of the constitutional provisions, the University has yet to implement the UGC guidelines on SC/ST reservation at all entry levels. Effective guidelines for reservation for OBCs and the differently-abled are also still not in place.

• Admission Policy: The University needs a transparent and rational and inclusive central admission policy, also sensitive to issues of capacity and infrastructure. The policy must also ensure filling of the OBC seats instead of excluding eligible candidates as has happened.

• Arbitrariness over NET: Those exempted under earlier provisions must remain exempted. The UGC PhD regulation should be implemented prospectively.

• Delhi Government Colleges: After taking away DCE from Delhi University, the Delhi Government is planning to take away colleges fully funded by it to a state university and has threatened not to pay the 10% employer’s contribution to PF.

• Professional Colleges: Teachers of the RAK College of Nursing and Nehru Homeopathy College have been denied parity in pay and designation. The rotational principle for headship is not respected in medical & other professional colleges. Autocratic functioning and arbitrariness mar the environment.

• School of Open Learning: While the number of students enrolled in the School has tripled, teachers have dwindled from 135 to 35. By raising fees the School is fleecing students to make a profit.

• Departmental Councils must be made statutory and the practice of HODs to bypass them in violation of long-standing practices must be resisted.

• Research Supervision: Discriminatory norms of the Science Faculty to restrict research supervision by college teachers must end.

• Action against erring Principals: Impartial inquiries must be instituted into the charges brought by the Staff Associations of Dyal Singh College and Ram Lal Anand College against their Principals.

• Attendance Register: In some colleges, teachers are being forced to mark attendance. This must stop.

• Leave Encashment & PF: The UGC regulations vide a clarification stipulate encashment of earned leave only for “non-vacation members of the teaching staff”, thereby denying this benefit to teachers. The 8% cap on interest on PF adhered to by the University and some colleges must be removed.

• Child Care Leave: The UGC has notified on 29 June 2011 that appointments may be made against vacancies arising from Child Care leave. This should be made immediately effective.

• Health Care Facilities: The restricted operation of the direct payment system and reimbursements only at CGHS rates even when hospitals charges are much higher are causing great hardship. A scheme of full reimbursement is needed. The hike in WUHS subscription rates must be rolled back.

• Housing Facilities: More housing should be provided in view of the general increase in numbers of teachers as well as the large number of single women and differently-abled teachers.

• Facilities for the differently-abled: Appropriate infrastructure and study materials must be provided. Teachers with visual disability must get assistance for evaluating answer scripts and written assignments.

Electx

• Amar Deo Sharma

Dept of Hindi, Delhi College of Arts & Commerce
Ph: 9868173032, 9560826961

as the DUTA President

and

• Abha Dev Habib
  Dept of Physics, Miranda House
  Ph: 9818383074

• Anil Kumar
  Dept of Hindi, Moti Lal Nehru College,
  Ph: 9868264503

• Giriraj Bairwa
  Dept of Political Science, Rajdhani College
  Ph: 9818466999

• Saikat Ghosh
  Dept of English, SGTB Khalsa College
  Ph: 9910091754

to the DUTA Executive

…

At the meeting of the Academic Council on 8 July, DTF elected representatives submitted a protest note objecting to the manner in which meetings of the Academic Council have been convened and decisions taken. They also submitted a dissent note on the semesterised courses, curricula and syllabi which were on the agenda of the meeting. The texts of the two notes are given below:

Protest Note

We, the undersigned, take exception to the manner in which meetings of the Academic Council have been convened and decisions taken therein for the following reasons:

1. Not providing adequate time, even the minimum time stipulated in the Regulations 3.2 of the Regulations relating to the Academic Council amounts to denying the Academic Council the required time for application of mind. Any decision taken by such meetings is ill-considered and arbitrary and is in violation of the Act, Statutes, Ordinances and Regulations governing the University.
   .
   Regulations 3.2 clearly stipulates that “The Registrar shall, ordinarily, at least seven days before each meeting of the Academic Council, issue to each member thereof, a notice convening the meeting and a copy of the Agenda thereof:” It is obvious that the stipulation of issuing agenda at least seven days before is to enable members to peruse the issues and apply their mind in order that the Academic council can take responsible and wise decisions. If the agenda is substantial and large, the same should be circulated well in advance keeping in mind the time required for meaningful engagement with the issues involved.
   .
   The last meeting held on 25.4.2011 which considered a large number of courses was unacceptably called on an emergent basis and the agenda papers was issued to many members just a day or two before the meeting. The decisions taken in that meeting cannot be considered as due or responsible. The meeting that is being held today i.e. on 8.7.2011 is similarly being held without giving adequate time and is to consider again a large number of courses. The notice for this regular meeting has been dated 2.7.2011 a date that is not even, let alone at least, seven days before today. This notice and agenda has been issued to most members in the evening of 3.7.2011 or later. This repeated denial of adequate time suggests that ill-considered decisions regarding courses are being pushed through by considerations other than academic.
   .
2. It is shocking that the minutes of the decisions taken in the meetings of the Academic Council held on 9.11.2009 and 13.5.2010 are being placed for confirmation one and half year later for confirmation. This is unacceptable when the term of a large number of members present in those meetings has ended. Further, such lapse of time allows scope for motivated alterations in the details of the decisions taken. This is specifically a point of concern with regards to decisions which are under dispute in various forums. It is incumbent that the process of making and recording decisions be above suspicion of tampering, the scope for which widens with inexcusable delay in holding meetings.

Signed by
Renu Bala, Sheo Dutt, Rakesh Kumar

Dissent note

The semesterised courses, curricula and syllabi of the undergraduate courses under consideration in the Academic Council today do not meet the requirements of well-considered restructuring of the existing programmes for the following reasons:

1. The courses, curricula and syllabi which are being replaced were results of painstaking endeavour drawing on the experience and expertise of the large number of teachers engaged in the teaching of the same programmes as well as peers/ experts outside the university through a process of discussion, scrutiny, questioning and rethinking over several drafts.
   .
2. The drafts of courses, curricula and syllabi being considered today have been drawn up in haste by individual Committees of Courses, mostly under protest and out of compulsion due to a fear of arbitrary bifurcation of the courses by the Vice-Chancellor. Some Committees such as those of the Departments of Economics, History, English and Sociology have brought it on record that they are sending drafts which they consider academically undesirable. It will be improper to thrust such questionable courses on students merely to meet some deadline for implementation of semester system.
   .
3. The inappropriate haste in which this restructuring is being done is evident in the fact that certain courses such as economics and history undergraduate programmes are incomplete and do not envision papers to be included beyond the first two semesters. A course to which a student is admitted cannot be and should not be academically incomplete and incoherent.
   .
4. The incoherence is not peculiar to the incomplete courses alone. The BA (Hons) and BA Programmes had a well thought out common framework/ structure which stipulated a certain numbers of language papers, concurrent (discipline/ interdisciplinary) papers, foundation and application papers in a definite sequence. The number of such papers and their sequence had been determined for the annual system after much debate and application of mind. No such exercise has been undertaken despite its absolute necessity before semesterised courses, even if they were desirable, could be made by individual committees of courses. It is unforgiveable that despite this essential requirement being pointed out by the Faculty of Social Sciences in writing to the Vice Chancellor, the Academic Council has not been allowed to duly deliberate on the issue. A claim has been made that the last meeting of the AC decided belatedly after arbitrarily approving many BA Programme and BA (Hons) courses that the syllabi of the existing concurrent/ credit courses shall remain unchanged. Such a decision, even if adopted without due deliberation and application of mind, remains arbitrary and incoherent since it fails to specify the sequencing of papers semester-wise and ignores the fact that compressing papers designed to be taught over a year at a certain pace to the span of a semester is pedagogically a dubious decision. Moreover, it is incomprehensible that some concurrent papers that were meant for first year students have now been shifted to the second year and second year papers to the third year without any change in content. Even this unclear and ill-thought decision was made too late leaving no reasonable time for courses to be framed and leading to unscrutinised proposals with imbalanced workload whereby the only way teaching can be provided to students depends on the existence of a permanent pool of unemployed teachers who are to hired for a semester during a year and fired afterward. It does not augur well for providing quality education.
   .
5. The imbalance, incoherence and the questionable standards of the proposed courses will lead to substantial delays and difficulties in making time-tables for teaching and adversely affect teaching-learning. The Academic Council as a responsible body should not be party to pushing the teaching-learning process into a chaos or causing its debasement.

It appears that an adamant insistence in pushing the semester system in haste has got the better of the objective of promoting excellence and equity in higher education. I, therefore, record my dissent on the course, curriculum and syllabi of each of the undergraduate course which are being considered for semesterisation in this meeting. We also urge that better sense prevails and that more time is given for due deliberation since not hurrying through changes in this manner can only benefit students. Any change must be properly discussed and decided before students making life-defining choices are subjected to it.

Signed by
Renu Bala, Sheo Dutt, Rakesh Kumar

7 July 2011

The DUTA elections scheduled for 25 August 2011 are taking place at a time when the onslaught on higher education under the neo-liberal agenda of the UPA Government has increased manifold. There is an attempt to withdraw state funding from higher education and to push existing public institutions towards generating their own funds. Instead of investing money and energy in establishing more institutions providing quality education, the MHRD looks at fragmentation of the existing universities as a way to create an illusion of expansion.

This assault on higher education is amply clear from the bills pending before the Parliament, which include the Foreign Educational Institutions Bill, the Educational Tribunals Bill, the Universities for Innovation Bill and the National Accreditation Regulatory Authority for Higher Educational Institutions Bill These bills not only aim at facilitating private players within the country and abroad to sell education as a commodity but also to decrease the democratic spaces within the Universities.

Today the Central Universities are being arm-twisted by the MHRD to align themselves to the academic calendar and teaching programmes of American universities. The semester system has been forced upon DU. The university administration has chosen to follow diktats of the MHRD instead of standing committed to maintaining academic standards and the democratic practices necessary for the free exchange of ideas and debate. The interim High court orders were used by the DU administration to implement the semester system in an unacademic manner.

The UGC regulations relating to service conditions of teachers are a clear design to deny promotions. The irrational attempt to quantify academic and other institutional work done by teachers on the basis of a point system would lead to both a flight of talent from the teaching profession as well as a decline in quality of education.

The task ahead for a responsible Teachers’ Association is to organize collective resistance to this assault through reasoned argument and mass action. The goals of expansion, equity and excellence in education at all levels are mutually complementary and should be pursued harmoniously through greater public investment and public control over education. The DTF stands committed to resist Government policies of privatization and commercialization and to work towards a better academic environment at the University.

The DTF General Body at its meeting on 6 July 2011 decided unanimously to field the following candidates for the forthcoming DUTA elections:

For the post of the DUTA President:
x

Amar Deo Sharma

Dept of Hindi, DCAC
Tel: 9868173032

For the DUTA Executive:x

• Abha Dev Habib
  Dept of Physics, Miranda House
  Tel: 9818383074

• Anil Kumar
  Dept of Hindi, Moti Lal Nehru College
  Tel: 9868264503

• Giriraj Bairwa
  Dept of Political Science, Rajdhani College
  Tel: 9818466999
  

• Saikat Ghosh
  Dept of English, SGTB Khalsa College
  Tel: 9910091754

Amar Deo Sharma has been long associated with the teachers’ movement and has been elected to various posts including that of DUTA President, DUTA Joint Secretary and Member, Academic Council. Abha Dev Habib was twice elected to the Academic Council (2006-08, 2008-10). She is also the Secretary, MH Staff Association. Giriraj Bairwa is an experienced activist and was elected to the DUTA Executive twice earlier. Anil Kumar has been associated with the teachers’ movement actively for the last few years. Saikat Ghosh has contributed to energize the Association at Khalsa College and has actively participated in the teachers’ movement on the semester system.

Admissions for the academic session 2011-12 has started today with the declaration of the first cut-offs.The high cut-offs are an outcome of yet another mindless reform causing immense harassment to admission seekers who would have to go through several rounds of admissions and cancellations before securing a seat of their choice. It also shows that the data generated through OMR forms was necessary for arriving at realistic cut offs. It is yet another example of a hurried change in policy without consultation with College Principals and teachers or deliberations in statutory bodies.

The DTF elected Executive and Academic Council members had made a representation to the VC against this move soon after the Admission notification of 19 April 2011.

The University administration, by withdrawing the OMR forms, has wriggled out of its responsibility of processing centralized admission. It sought instead to market its irresponsible action as a student friendly ‘reform’. If the idea was to make the admission process easy for students and parents, the DU Administration should have made the process online.

The DU administration has failed in providing adequate infrastructure in colleges to cope with OBC expansion. High cut offs is seen by colleges as the only option as they face acute shortage of lecture rooms and lab space. At this juncture the problem of over-admission cannot be treated as a triviality. In the absence of data usually provided by the OMR forms, and guided by the news of inflated CBSE results, the colleges have declared high cut offs.The ‘New Admission Policy’ which was marketed as a reform may turn out to be a nightmare for the students and parents.

The Admission Notification of 19 April 2011 also contained a Clause that reads as follows:

The prospectus of the college should clearly state that all undergraduate degree courses shall be taught in semester mode in the academic session 2011-12.

The DTF takes serious note of this clause which is a serious infringement on the rights of decision making statutory bodies. Not only is this clause misleading admission seeking students, it is also in violation of the Act of the University as these courses are yet to be notified as per the Ordinances.

A clause like (10) is tantamount to an irresponsible action that seeks to thrust on students curricula and syllabi which neither they nor the teachers who are to teach know about. That the administration and the Government do not care about the future of students is evident in this hasty imposition of ill-prepared courses. In violation of the Act, the syllabi and structure of the courses, which were passed in a hasty manner in the AC and EC meetings of 25 April 2011, are being tampered everyday leaving teachers clueless of the workload and teaching responsibilities for the new academic session. The clarity about the concurrent courses is completely missing.

Further, we wish to highlight that as per the Ordinances, the admission is to a course. Till date the University has not notified semester syllabi and structure for the Honours Courses of the Departments under the Faculty Social Sciences and Departments of English and GRS . The semester based courses have not been ratified by the Statutory Bodies including Academic Council and Executive Council.

The DU Vice Chancellor should respond to this in a responsible manner and withdraw clause 10 of the Admission Notification. The admission to these courses has to be treated as admission to the existing annual courses as they are the only permissible courses as per the Ordinances.

To
Aditya Narain Mishra,
President,
Delhi University Teachers’ Association

27 May 2011

We, the undersigned, request you to urgently convene a meeting of the DUTA Executive to discuss the highly questionable order pronounced on 16.5.2011 by the High Court of Delhi in the W.P.(C) No. 822/2011 filed by the DUTA. We draw your attention specifically to paragraph 8 of the said order wherein it is stated that “we command that all the teachers of the University of Delhi and all colleges affiliated to the said University shall cooperate in all aspects and teach in the semester mode and not proceed on the path of deviation which would, in the slightest manner, bring them in the net of the violators of the orders of the Court, for the order of Court has to be treated with respect regard being had to its sanctity in a country governed by Rule of Law.”, and to paragraph 9 wherein it is stated that “we repeat our order which was passed on earlier occasion and command the teachers of the University and the affiliated colleges not to deviate and to extend fullest cooperation on all aspects and in all spheres pertaining to teaching in the semester mode.”

It is shocking that such an order has been pronounced in the context of the resolution passed by the Staff Council of the Dyal Singh College on 2.5.2011 that is critical of the notification issued on 19.4.2011 in the name of the University of Delhi by its administration demanding that colleges mention in their prospectus that all courses would be in the semester system when the University of Delhi had not brought about such a change on that day and seeking unreasonable demand that additional eligibility criteria for admission to the various courses of the colleges be framed without providing the information about the contents of the courses. During the hearing on 12.5.2011, the University counsel explained the meaning of “additional eligibility criteria” for admissions first as courses to be provided for the semester system and then as criteria required to pass from one semester to the next. The conclusion reached by the Court that not providing additional eligibility criteria is tantamount to violating the Court’s order to teach in the semester system needs to be questioned at least to get know what in the Court’s mind is teaching in the semester system.

It is pertinent to mention that the administration in a manner that is manipulative and academically poor managed meetings of the AC and EC on 25.5.2011 and notified on 9.5.2011 the questionable decisions taken by these bodies without due application of mind and based on concerns other than academic. The order of the court ignores these facts.

If the extension of co-operation were to mean that a teacher as a member of the statutory body cannot express its opposition to arbitrary dictates by the administration, moreover when those are at variance with the Act, Statutes, Ordinances and Regulations of the University, the order does not appear to be judicious or sensitive about the academic consequences.

In fact the order goes beyond the issue of Dyal Singh College resolution and beyond the earlier orders by the court in W.P.(C) 7248/2010 filed by Mr. M.R. Gupta as well as the in relation to the writ by the DUTA. While on 15.11.2008, in the context of the 13 UG science courses directed that “The teachers serving in all 31 colleges, out of which in 13 colleges wherein semester system has been introduced as have been identified by the University shall teach in the semester mode”, the order passed on 8.2.2011 to the effect that “The teachers teaching in the University or the affiliated colleges shall not go on strike and impart education in the semester system.” was ambiguous. The ambiguity of that order to impart education in the semester mode has now received a sweeping interpretation pronounced on 16.5.2011 that teaching in semester mode may mean not only teaching in semester mode such courses which are in semester mode but co-operate in every way with somehow in converting all courses to semester system. Co-operation is a laudable action. However, if co-operation means teachers not showing a sense of responsibility towards courses that would be thrust on students, it acquires a different meaning. For example, the Faculty of Social Science had pointed out to the VC that B.A. (Hons) courses need a framework. The B.A. (Hons) courses in the University had always shared a common framework of language and subsidiary/ concurrent (discipline and inter-disciplinary) subjects. Without those being specified by the AC/ EC through ordinances, no specific honours courses could be formulated by any one Department/ Faculty as each B.A courses relate to many departments across Faculties. Even the distribution of papers of the main subjects over the three years/ six semesters cannot have an academic basis without adoptionof such a framework. The VC first tried to hoodwink Departments to accept a framework of 24 papers divided in certain manner as proposed by a nominated committee and then took the position that the framework was only advisory in nature. It essentially shows that the AC & EC have not bothered to apply their mind to bring about a common framework necessary to effect semesterisation, let alone the wisdom behind or the unacademic manner in which the decision to semesterise was taken. The same problem confronts B.A. Programme. The structure had not been debated or decided either by the B.A. Programme Committee which alone could have advised the AC in the matter. In effect, such important academic decisions on the structure and framework of courses have been usurped by the administration.

The basis for passing such an order to all teachers is questionable precisely because the Court had not considered the relevant facts and arguments. Moreover, there was no urgency in the Court assuming the role of a facilitator in the hasty and chaotic implementation of the semester system. In fact, there is an urgency in staying such implementation since it would only benefit students if any restructuring that were to be done were done after due process and application of mind and serious harm will be done to them in framing courses in such haste.

The phrases used in the court order such as co-operate are in consonance with the submission made to the court by the Delhi University on 13.5.2011 wherein vide para 10, it had sought direction to “all the concerned parties (all departments and all colleges) to cooperate in all respects for effective implementation of all the Resolutions passed by the Academic Council and Executive Council, including the resolutions of 25.4.2011, for implementation of semester system in all undergraduate courses in the academic session commencing in July 2011.” If the order in fact is a relief given to the respondents though the petitioners’ prayers and submissions are pointing out the academic undesirability, the infirmities and the incomplete nature of these resolutions, then the order does not do justice to the petition. Without considering the petitioners submissions, granting to relief to the respondents precisely to facilitate actions which have been challenged does not appear to be judicious decision. The consequences of such an order harm the interest of the academic institution or students admitted to it.

It is urgent, therefore, to take steps to challenge the order/ seek review of the order/ seek stay on the implementation of the semester system in other courses.

We believe that last week you had a discussion with the UGC on the DUTA memorandum on service conditions submitted last year. We also request you to apprise the DUTA Executive of developments in this regard and initiate necessary steps for achieving the demands the DUTA has placed before the UGC/MHRD.

Thanking you,

With regards,

Rajib Ray

Renu Bala

Sheo Dutt

Rakesh Kumar

Amitava Chakraborty

Kuldeep Kumar

Rudrashish Chakraborty

Post facto “approval” was obtained for past wrongdoings. Shoddily designed courses prepared by wrongly constituted committees and in blatant disregard for widespread academic concerns were pushed through. And for courses not yet semesterised, the Vice-Chancellor “obtained” the authorisation of the AC to get them done. Several elected members dissented on a number of issues. The text of the dissent note submitted by DTF members with regard to the holding of a “requisitioned” and “emergency” meeting is as follows:

The Vice-Chancellor
University of Delhi

25 April 12011

We object to the holding of this requisitioned and emergency meeting on the agenda listed. Notice of the meeting was received only in the evening yesterday. In the past requisitions submitted by elected members have repeatedly not been honoured; and yet this time such a meeting has evidently been deliberately planned and convened without giving even one day’s notice in order to deprive members of the possibility of reasoned deliberation on matters of utmost importance. No time was given to consult the concerned teachers about the items on the agenda. For the physically challenged member of this Academic Council the short notice has caused even greater problems since the agenda papers were not provided in an appropriate form to facilitate his reading. We accuse the Vice-Chancellor of complete disregard for democratic functioning, absolute indifference to serious academic issues and utter disdain towards the Delhi University Act, Statutes and Ordinances.

With regard to the items listed we have the following objections:

 1. No time has been given for reading the syllabi.

2. The BA Programme Committee, which has members from each college, has not met with regard to the changes in syllabi listed, nor has it constituted any sub-committees to prepare new syllabi for the Application or Foundation Courses. By what procedure and by whom have the BA Programme syllabi proposed been prepared?

3. Proper procedures have also not been followed before sending the listed syllabi of other courses for discussion in the Academic Council:

a. Serious lacunae and irregularities were there in the constitution of the Faculty of Arts the meetings of which were held on 14th and 28th March. The names of members from 25 colleges were missing from the official list of members put out by the University. This is in violation of Statute 9(3)(v) which states that the members of the Faculty will include “One Teacher concerned, by rotation according to seniority, from each College”. The members from these colleges have been denied the right to participate in deliberations about courses to be taught in these colleges. Though this was pointed out by several members at the beginning of the meeting, they were not heeded. The decisions taken in meetings of such improperly constituted statutory bodies cannot be considered valid.

b. Syllabi were “approved” by the improperly constituted Faculty of Arts at both meetings, on 14th and 28th March, without circulating them in advance to members so that no application of mind was possible.

c. The names of members from 14 colleges were missing from the official list of members of the Faculty of Mathematical Sciences which met on 9th March. In this case too there has been a violation of Statute 9(3)(v).

d. Meetings of the Committees of Courses in the Faculty of Mathematical Sciences were held in a surreptitious and hurried manner without any democratic consultation. Colleges were not informed that syllabi had been put on the website, therefore they could not respond. The proposed syllabi was put on the website on 24th February with last date for responses being 2nd March. The Committee of Courses meeting was held on 3rd March and the Faculty of Mathematical Sciences meeting on 9th March.

4. Decisions have been taken through a process of intimidation and threats by the University administration that has vitiated any free deliberation on important academic issues.

5. All this is also reflected in the numerous and grave errors and lacunae in the syllabi on the agenda.

In view of the above, we record our dissent on the decisions of this meeting.

Sd/-
Sheo Dutt, Rakesh Kumar, Renu Bala, Amitava Chakraborty