New Sahitya Akademi secy provokes war of words

It has provoked literary luminaries in the country to rise and sign a public statement, which will be issued tomorrow, condemning the Akademi’s president Prof Gopichand Narang of ‘‘using the Akademi’s autonomy as a cover for autocracy’’ and bemoaning its ‘‘downfall and loss of prestige.’’

They will also appeal to the President of India and the Culture Ministry. The signatories are eminent novelists, poets and short-story writers like Mahasweta Devi, Krishna Sobti, Ganesh Sobti, Rajendra Yadav, Gyan Ranjan, Pankaj Vish, Chandrakant Patil, N D Mahanoor, Viren Dangwal and K G Shankar Pillai, among 20 others.

The charge: In 2003, Krishnamurthy was under scrutiny by the CBI over his alleged involvement in a paper purchase deal. After investigations, the matter went to the CVC, which recommended action against Krishnamurthy. The Akademi took its own course claiming it was an autonomous body. Krishnamurty was given a clean chit after a departmental inquiry by its president and eminence grise who proposed his name — Gopichand Narang.

Narang too is not without beef — Harkishen Singh Surjeet termed him as an RSS lackey and demanded his immediate removal as part of the ‘‘saffron detoxification’’ of institutions. He had taken over the Akademi after an irascible contest with none other than Mahasweta Devi.

In the last fortnight, there have been public demonstrations and rallies organised by the Kannada Sahitya Parishad and the Kannada Rakshata Samiti in Bangalore and Mysore even as columnists in Kannada newspapers have raged against the ‘‘literary dwarfs in Delhi.’’ Krishnamurthy has been commiserated for becoming an OBC victim of the superior Brahminical section — all this because the Culture Ministry, which has now jumped into the fray, has raised a technical objection to the appointment.

A noted Akademi member says, ‘‘Krishnamurthy deliberately created the Kannada vs non-Kannada controversy so that his corruption case and mediocre credentials are buried under the brouhaha.’’

While the Akademi’s screening and selection committee went the routine for the selection of secretary (though a crucial criterion for qualification, a doctoral degree, was waived in favour of Krishnamurthy ‘‘for his long experience and publications’’), it did not get the requisite clearance from the Cabinet Screening Committee necessary for direct recruitment.

Says the joint secretary, Culture Ministry, who is a member of the Executive Board, ‘‘This formality was not complied with, however, once it is okayed by the Government, I do not see a problem.’’

Narang is equally circumspect when he says, ‘‘The Government clearance is a mere formality, as it takes so long to fill posts. We’ve agreed we can go ahead and appoint people as soon as possible and only the letter of appointment says it is subject to the Government clearance.’’

Narang is equally dismissive of threats that he is a ‘‘marked man’’ by secularists and could be turfed out like Sonal Mansing, former chairperson of the Sangeet Natak Akademi, when he says, ‘‘I am an elected president, not a Government appointee like Sonal.’’ He admits there was a CBI inquiry against the new secretary but he was ‘‘cleared’’ after a departmental inquiry. ‘‘We are an autonomous body, and the action part is left to us.’’

Narang has the last word on the issue when he remarks on the Culture Ministry’s observations: ‘‘The Government has said that until Krishnamurthy’s appointment is cleared, the secretary’s post will be held by the senior-most member of the Akademi. It is none other than Krishnamurthy himself.’’