UPA attack on former NCERT boss Rajput full of sound, fury and some farce as well

Satyam’s report on Rajput reads like a mountain—accusing him of ‘‘nepotism, vindictiveness, authoritarian(ism), ruthlessness, subterfuge, unleashing a reign of terror’’— but is, in fact, little more than a molehill.

The report’s executive summary says that 69 complaints were baseless and action is needed on 101 but there’s not even the mention of the substantive allegation of saffronisation. Or how he got NCERT to publish history books that had portions plagiarised from those written by US academics.

Instead, the report is a virtual re-write of complaints, several of them first made in anonymous letters prepared by the anti-Rajput lobby or the Left. And even cites one complaint calling him ‘‘Ruthless Academic Terrorist.’’

Consider the wording and the claims made in the report:

• Rajput let ICICI Bank set up an ATM in the NCERT campus and six months later, his son a job in ICICI Bank. ‘‘It can be reasonably presumed that there was a casual nexus between the two events,’’ says the report.

• On ‘‘irresponsible use of NCERT funds,’’ the report censures Rajput saying that during his tenure, ‘‘the budget utilization was maximized.’’ It lists the giving of ‘‘500 (unpriced) copies of Dr Makkhanlal’s book’’ to Dr Makkhanlal himself as one irregularity. Or the fact that the Sanskrit project was implemented ‘‘without bothering to determine its impact.’’

• The report says Rajput helped wife Sarla Rajput to get a professor’s job in NCERT. The report makes no mention of Rajput’s argument that one of his staunchest critics on the campus Arjun Dev was on one screening committee which processed his wife’s application.

• Rajput, the report says, helped his daughter get a job in NCERT. The fact is his daughter is employed with the University Grants Commission headquarters.

• ‘‘Dr J S Rajput is a person of strong likes and dislikes. He acted with unabashed vindictiveness towards whom he disliked. But the few persons whom he liked were often favoured extraordinarily.’’ The report lists 13 ‘‘irregular’’ appointments in Rajput’s six-year tenure. These include an Assistant Editor of an NCERT publication to a journalist’s wife who got a Rs 3.5-lakh consultant’s job.

• ‘‘The basic problem with Dr Rajput is his style of administration. Throughout his career he is known to have been authoritarian in style, autocratic in approach, arrogant in demeanour, inaccessible at work and uncommunicative in dealings.’’

• ‘‘Dr Rajput let loose a reign of terror. He was totally intolerant of dissent. There was public rebuke and humiliation in open meetings even of senior faculty members.’’

When contacted, Rajput said: ‘‘I will not comment until I see the report.’’