AMU

Iqbal A. Ansari on Aligarh Muslim University

The indefinite closure of the Aligarh Muslim University on October 1, 1996 should make the well- wishers of the University sit up and take stock of the underlying causes of the malaise which is both pervasive and deep. The University and its old boys were involved for full 15 years (1965-1980) in getting it ensured under an Act of Parliament that the University was founded by Muslims for their educational uplift Since 1981 when such an Act was enacted, there has been no effort unfortunately to systematically secure without recourse to ad hoc measures the twin objectives of legitimate interests of the Muslim minority and academic merit and excellence.

It is still not too late to salvage the University, enabling it to function efficiently with a sense of purpose and direction. Initiative needs to be taken by members of the University statutory bodies, the Staff Association, the alumni and some enlightened community leaders to undertake a review of the Act, statutes, and ordinances of the University on the one hand and its academic and administrative functioning on the other. It will also. require constructing the sociology of the University understand the reasons of appointment of teachers and non-teaching staff for considerations other than merit and efficiency or for admission of students who are neither equipped nor motivated for any learning. A comprehensive study of the 'law' and 'sociology of the University along with empirical data will (be revealing).

Even without waiting for the findings of such a comprehensive sociological-legal study of the University as an institution, what can be said with certainty is the fact that unless there is transparency and accountability in all administrative and academic processes, and unless admissions and appointments are made on the basis of merit among Muslims to the extent permissible on an all-India basis, nothing can prevent the decay of the University.

The category of 'internal' and 'external' was created for admissions of the students in 1960s to accommodate a large percentage of Muslim students in the name of 'internal... To this category of 'internal' was added a whole list of nominated categories of old boys, employees, sportsmen etc. Ail this process of back door entry has been going on for full three decades in the name of Muslim interest. Actual beneficiaries of this mode of admission have not been Muslims of India as a community, but the group of privileged people who enjoyed the benefit of 'proximity' and access, ie., presence on or near the campus and influential connections. This protective and distorting admission process ensured neither legitimate interest of Muslims (nor) academic merit, led to a scramble among both Hindus and Muslims for internal seats right from primary even nursery stage of schooling. This protective process also caused slackness and inefficiency in internal schools and the university by attaching premium to just being internal.

Muslims as a community or the University as an institution never made any attempt to legitimize front door entry of Muslim students transparently selected on the basis of an all India merit list without any nomination. Effort was not made because it suited to those who enjoyed the benefits by virtue of proximity and access... including the employees, and it also suited. Some Vice- Chancellor(s) for safeguarding their own 'seat of power by extending such patronage. The admissions become a part of loot and booty system (and) were made available for a price under the table.

It is just absurd that the highest governing and policy laying body of the University having directed the Academic Council to admit students according to a formula which by and large tried to reconcile considerations of Muslim interest, all India open merit and regional and internal categories were never implemented.

The Supreme Court judgement (1991) in St. Stephen's College case (provided) the opportunity of front door admission of Muslims up to 50% Such a process of legitimacy of front door entry of Muslim students will eradicate most sources of corruption in admissions on which student leaders and a few among the administrative staff thrived. It will also general a real competition among all Muslims students internal - as well as... the unfortunate externals.

For appointment of meritorious teachers and other employees (what) is required is the will on the part of members of the Selection Committee. But this 'will' is a function of the social-cultural ethos of a community/ group.

The last neglected area of reform is the administrative wing and the technical and library personnel whose functioning should be geared towards supporting pursuit of knowledge by students and faculty members. Suitable inquiry will reveal that the entire system, including the library, is geared towards obstructing the process of learning and generation of knowledge. Even if all students were admitted on the basis of merit and all the teachers were qualified and proficient, the administrative-technical junk existing in the University will prevent any academic excellence to grow.

(Source: The Radiance Views weekly, 10.16 November, 1996)

AMU

Shahabuddin on the Reforms of the AMU

Prof. Iqbal A. Ansari's article on the AMU in your issue of 10-16 November, 1996 is based on certain inaccurate assumptions. Contrary to official propaganda and public belief, the Act of 1980 did not provide that "the University was founded by Muslims for their educational uplift!" In other words the Act and, therefore, the Union Government has never accepted the assertion by the Muslim community that the AMU is a minority institution within the meaning of Article 30 of the Constitution. This is the reason why the University cannot enjoy freedom either in selection of students for admission or in recruitment of teaching or non-teaching staff, it cannot create even a reasonable quota for admission for Muslim students and has, therefore, to continue with many subterfuges and commoflages and introduce deliberate distortions to maintain a reasonable proportion of Muslim in the Students Body which incidentally has been falling since 1980, as far as professional and more marketable courses are concerned.

There is no point in studying the Sociology of admission or employment, until the law is clarified. This cannot be done by a review of the students and the Ordinances set only by an amendment of the Act itself- something which is beyond the purview of the University bodies, including the Court. But the E.C. and the Court can certainly propose a Scheme of Admission and suggest amendment to the Act, if necessary, to implement it- particularly to declare it a Minority Institution without ifs and buts and reserve 75% of the seats for the Muslim community.

I fully endorse the diagnosis of Prof. Ansari that the categorisation of applicants as "external" and "internal" and the inbuilt weightage for the products of the Schools attached to the University is at the heart of the graduate but inevitable looming of standards, Lack of transparency in admission and examination, surfeit of nepotism and "sifarish-Pairvi" and the V.C's quota in the long run ensure recruitment of sub-standard teachers sets the cycle of excellence in reverse gear. The final result is what we see happening in the campus.

AMU is a national asset, it is a Milli asset. It should cater to the entire Muslim community of India without any undue favours to students from Aligarh or the neighbouring districts or the sons and daughters of Old Boys.

Prof. Ansari has not mentioned one noticeable omission in AMU's advertisements to admission various courses. The advertisements never mention the number of sanctioned seats in any course. This makes even the backdoor flexible enough to admit any pulls or pressures. In my view, the AMU authorities must, even with the limit of the present Act, such as

a)     limit nomination to 5% for excellence in non-

b)    academic fields sports, debate, literary activities etc. subject to inter se merit.

c)     Announce the number of available seats for each intake point - degree, diploma and certificate.

d)    Hold competitive examination plus Two and First year Year Degree Courses on the all India basis in places other than Aligarh.

e)     Stop preferential admission to products of AMU's schools.

f)     Publish admission lists with aggregate marks, in order of merit, with 10% additional places and supply marksheets to any applicant on request.

g)    Reserve viva voce test in addition to written test, only for admission to Masters and Professional Courses. The composition of the interview boards. should not be limited to the University staff. If possible, the Viva voice tests should be recorded and the marks awarded by each member of the Board should be preserved. At least the number of available places should be called for the interview in order of merit judged either by referee to the common written test or the academic record of the qualifying examination.

h)    Stop all adhoc appointments and recruit the best available teacher on All India basis through properly constituted Selection Committees, without any consideration of religion or university. Selection Commissions should be constituted in advance and meet regularly, in advance of the date when the vacancy is likely to occur.

Some of these suggestion, it is realised, will not be appreciated by the vested interest, which have the university in their grip. But if the University is to be saved, talent and excellence can justify the expenditure of nearly Rs. 75 crore every year, in the name of the Muslim community.

Letter to The Radiance Viewsweekly, 12 November, 1996