Resolution passed by the General Body of Aligarh Muslim University Teachers’ Association (AMUTA) in its emergent meeting held on March 31, 2012 at 7:00 P.M.

ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY TEACHERS’ ASSOCIATION, ALIGARH

S. Mustafa Zaidi Hony. Secretary

Teaching Staff Club, AMU, Aligarh, 202002             0571-3203520      (O);             0571-2720011       (R);            09411802364       (M) Email: secretaryamuta@gmail.com Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/AMUTeachers Blog: http://www.secretaryamuta.blogspot.com

April 01 , 2012

Resolution passed by the General Body of Aligarh Muslim University Teachers’ Association (AMUTA) in its emergent meeting held on March 31, 2012 at 7:00 P.M.

This meeting of the General Body of AMUTA after a thorough discussion on the implications of judgment dated March 29, 2012 delivered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India regarding the appointment of Vice-Chancellor of AMU, places on record its deep sense of hurt and concern over the possible chaotic situation in the next few days.

The General Body is of the view that the Government has failed AMU and that it is squarely to blame for the state of inaction, confusion and chaos the University has fallen into. It is of opinion that the Hon’ble Supreme Court was not adequately and properly briefed about the provisions of the AMU Act by the legal luminaries appearing before it. This has resulted in a judgment that has grave implications for the day to day functioning of the University. The judgment has implicitly suspended many provisions of the AMU Act, Statutes and Ordinances; whereas the matter before the Hon’ble Court was only of who can be Vice-Chancellor based on the various interpretations of the provisions and was not concerned with the legality or otherwise of any provisions of the Act..

The judgment charges the Executive Council to carryout the functioning of the University and the Registrar to implement it, till such time that a Vice-Chancellor is appointed by the Visitor. We would most respectfully point out that the Executive Council is at present a nineteen member body of which the Registrar is not a part. Some of these nineteen members are based in cities far away from Aligarh, so how would the Executive Council carry out its functions on a daily basis? The Vice-Chancellor as an office is central to the functioning of the AMU; e.g. all examiners are appointed by him, all examination results, admissions, degrees, conference travel grants, monetary authorizations require either a direct signature or his consent. How can the University function like this?

The General Body would also like it to be noted that the present incumbent of the office of the Registrar is not a figure that inspires confidence in his working. This is besides the fact that he is facing a CBI enquiry ordered by the Hon’ble President of India against the corruption tainted regime of Prof. P.K. Abdul Azis. He is alleged to be involved in many irregularities including backdating the signing of the SLP on behalf of the University against the then Vice Chancellor, the General Body demands that this also needs to be enquired into and the available documentary evidence should be perused. Moreover, nowhere in the Act or Statutes does the Registrar have the power to call a meeting of the Executive Council, therefore, calling a meeting of the Executive Council on April 2, 2012 at Delhi, is both illegal and a waste of money. Many statutory provisions have and are being violated by the Registrar by this act. We, therefore, appeal to the members of the Executive Council that even if they attend this meeting in view of the extraordinary situation, they should take care and ensure that no authorization of any kind is given to any functionary, as that would be against the explicit orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and may be constructed as its contempt.

The General Body would like to categorically assert that this is a constitutional crisis of unimaginable consequences and therefore, appeals to the Hon’ble President of India in her capacity as the Visitor of AMU, the Ministry of Human Resource Development and the Executive Council of the University to seek an immediate clarification/review of the judgment, to save the University from coming to a standstill and, thus adversely affecting the career of thousands of students appearing in the examinations and, of those seeking admission here, an objective that the Supreme Court has also mentioned in para 9 & 11 of its judgment.

Note:  Some members while agreeing with the above have expressed a desire to condemn explicitly by name a teacher. This wasn’t accepted as AMUTA has never done so in the past. They have dissented on this basis.