AU ‘plagiarism’ case: Now,Aussie author denies knowledge

The publisher had also demanded punitive action against the editor of the Allahabad Geographical Society (AGS),university-approved society responsible for publishing a bi-annual journal,for violation of the Copyright Act.

The letter from R W Taylor,Head of Legal Cell of Prentice Hall,which was earlier sent to the university read that Berry had agreed to overlook the mistake provided AGS in the next issue of National Geographer declared that the paper was a case of plagiarism. This,however,was not done.

When Berry,Dean of School of Economic,Political and Policy Sciences,University of Texas,was informed that Prentice Hall’s legal department had sent a notice to Allahabad University,he said: “Neither PH nor anyone else,save you,has informed me of this,thus I am at sea. I know nothing of these allegations: what,where or which book,since I have published seven books with PH.”

Later,when some other source supplied Berry with the material which had led to the controversy,he responded through e-mail,(a copy of which is with The Indian Express): “I assume that the attached items,which I just received,are the materials to which you refer. This is the first I have seen of the matter. I was not consulted by Prentice Hall and did not make the concessions referred to in their alleged letter.” “The construction and phraseology of that letter led me to question its validity. I responded to Allahabad (university) and said I would be willing to check for plagiarism if they sent me the photocopies of the journal pages in question,” read the e-mail. When The Indian Express apprised Vice-Chancellor Rajen G Hershe of the developments,he said: “I must verify the authenticity of the letter.”

The buck does not stop here. K L Janjani,who is named as one of the legal representatives of Prentice Hall in the letter,denied any association with the company.

A senior advocate in the Supreme Court,Janjani said,“I have never been the legal advisor of Prentice Hall.” V Kumar,the other legal representative named in the letter,could not be reached.

Further,the website of Prentice Hall shows that the publishing house has been merged with Pearson Education in 1998. Roy also questioned the authenticity of the letter sent to the university. “How could a letter with the letterhead of Prentice Hall reach the university when the company has been non-existent since 1998?”

Roy,who was unwilling to discuss the matter when the controversy broke out,said the matter was raised after 37 years with a vested interest to malign her as well as the university’s reputation.

“There was a three-day conference in the department from October 29 to 31 and around 300 delegates from various universities had participated in the conference. The matter was planted in the media in a pre-planned manner during the meet,” said Roy.

According to Roy,when she wrote the paper in question,she was a research scholar and not a teacher. She had made a reference to Berry’s materials in her paper,but due to a printing mistake,three paragraphs from Berry’s book did not have the reference of the writer.