Syndicate divided over report

SURAT, Oct 14: In a university bereft of genuine issues, the Syndicate members of South Gujarat University are now slugging it out over t...

SURAT, Oct 14: In a university bereft of genuine issues, the Syndicate members of South Gujarat University are now slugging it out over the report of an inquiry into irregularities committed between 1990 and 1996 by the former director of a department which is almost defunct.

The Syndicate members are openly divided on the action to be taken against the suspended director of Continuing Education and Extension Nanubhai Joshi. Interestingly, the issue has transcended political barriers.

While former Gujarat Youth Congress president Hoshang Mirza, who was instrumental in the inglorious exit of former vice-chancellor Ashwin Kapadia and his band of supporters are all for punishing Joshi, on the other side are members nominated by the Bharatiya Janata Party government as well as two members whose links with the Congress are an open secret.

According to the inquiry committee report, which has been leaked, as many as 81 of the 83 charges 8212; most related to financial irregularities 8212; he allegedly committed as head of the department for six years up to 1996. He is charged with collecting money in the university8217;s name for various projects and depositing it in his own bank account while keeping the university in the dark.

Though the inquiry report was submitted six months ago it was never presented to the Syndicate on one pretext or the other, alleges Mirza. He says flimsy reasons are being cited to ensure that the report is diluted and Joshi is let off.

As a matter of habit he has called registrar V B Yadav incompetent. He also alleges that Joshi was in the good books of the former vice-chancellor, who ensured that the report was not listed on the agenda. It was finally listed when a group of Syndicate members stuck to their guns.

While Girish Rana, who is accused of leading the 8220;Save Joshi8221; campaign, says if he is found responsible he should be punished. He claims he raised queries in the Syndicate meeting because Joshi was not treated fairly. He was never given any memo for six years and each of the 83 charges were framed overnight.

Story continues below this ad

He claims the university could not answer any of the queries raised by him, leave aside satisfactory answers. In the absence of any information it was not proper to discuss the report. Moreover, Joshi was not even given maintenance allowance for the months he is under suspension. Quoting a tribunal order he says it is justified if a suspended employee absents himself from appearing before the inquiry committee if he is not paid maintenance allowance.