Premium
This is an archive article published on January 15, 2001

MUHS `gets back’ at govt for curbing powers

January 14: In retaliation to the state government's decision to bar the Maharashtra University of Health Sciences (MUHS) from conducting ...

.

January 14: In retaliation to the state government’s decision to bar the Maharashtra University of Health Sciences (MUHS) from conducting the Common Entrance Test (CET) for undergraduate medical courses, the Nashik-based university refused entry to a joint director of medical education who was dispatched from Mumbai.

The state Department of Medical Education and Research (DMER) had restrained the MUHS from conducting the CET on December 26 and instead appointedthe DMER as the competent authority. In quick retaliation, the MUHS on December 27 refused entry to S M Saptanekar, Joint Director (DMER), who was deputed by the DMER to oversee the valuation work of the CET for post-graduate medical courses conducted by the MUHS.

Sapatnekar was dispatched to the valuation centre at Nasik and was told to submit a comprehensive report to it. Despite being armed with an official order from the DMER, Sapatnekar was barred entry on the ground that it was against the rules prescribed under the MUHS Act, 1998. He was told that since the university’s Management Council had taken the decision, it would not be possible for the MUHS to entertain him. As a result, Sapatnekar had to return to Mumbai, without completing the task entrusted to him.

Story continues below this ad

“Since he was a nominee of the government, he should have been allowed to oversee the valuation work. The stand taken by the MUHS was not correct and have brought this to the notice of the government for appropriate action,” says a senior state government official.

The DMER had withdrawn the university’s powers to conduct CET, sating that it would be more convenient for students if the entrance test was conducted by the DMER instead.

When this was reported in Newsline on January 4, the university’s registrar N R Bhadane, was apparently irked. In a three-page statement, Bhadane had attempted to explain why the MUHS was competent to conduct the CET. “The university was to conduct the CET for 2000. However, when the vice-chancellor had told the government that he should either be allowed to proceed on leave since his daughter was taking the CET or the government should conduct the CET. Subsequently, the government asked the DMER to conduct the examination and also appointed it as the competent authority. The rest of the admission process was to be conducted by the MUHS. However, due to meage manpower, it was not possible for the MUHS to carry out the work. Therefore, even the admission process was completed by the DMER,” Bhadane had said.

From Bhadane’s lenthy `clarification’, it appears that he had not scrutinised the DMER’s December 26 order closely enough. While the order is completely silent on the issues raised by Bhadane, it clearly states that in view of the experience of the DMER while conducting the CET for the year 2000-2001 and for the convenience of the students, the DMER had been appointed as the competent authority for the year 2001-2002.

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement