HYDERABAD CENTRAL UNIVERSITY 

Students Rise In Unison Against Authorities, ABVP

Bhabani Shankar Nayak

FACING for a considerably long time a number of problems --- ranging from caste discrimination and gender inequality to those of hostel, mess, health centre, scholarship and many others --- students of the Hyderabad Central University (HCU) finally chose to gave vent to their grievances and rise to take them properly to the administration. This was in sharp contrast to what most of the earlier student unions did; they either confined to recreational activities or acted as the administration’s puppets.

In fact, this docile attitude of the student unions was what had made the university administration habitual of taking authoritarian decisions in all the matters, without even consulting the students union or students in general. Whenever progressive students tried to take these issues to the administration, the latter tried to divide the students on the basis of caste, gender, religion and community in order to weaken the Left and progressive forces in the campus. The authorities also used to suppress the student activists through the students supervisor or teachers of the concerned departments.

It was in such a situation that some SFI activists began to function under the banner of a broad-based University Discussion Forum (UDF). They organised seminars and workshops on various issues like caste, gender, communalism, terrorism, etc, in a bid to sensitise the campus. At the same time, they took up some basic issues facing the students in general. Gradually, the organisation began to develop. The university administration tried its best to suppress it through various means and even tried to defame the SFI’s activists. But the administration could not stop their activities. Rather their opposition sparked the activists’ spirit.

UNION ELECTION

In this background, this year’s student union election proved to be a turning point in the history of student movement in the Hyderabad Central University. The election process witnessed a good participation of the student community, dispelling the recurring doubts about depoliticisation of the HCU campus.

It was largely a bipolar contest. Under the banner of the UDF, the Left, secular and democratic forces joined the fight to seek a mandate for their pro-student agenda. The latter included a fight against privatisation, demand for more placements, increase in social welfare scholarships and merit-cum-means scholarships, an earn-while-learn scheme in the university, scholarship for research scholars, activation of the cell against sexual harassment, better computer and library facilities, a programme to combat communalism as well as strengthen the liberal and democratic academic ethos of the HCU. On the other hand, the Discovery (ABVP) sought a mandate in favour of ‘cultural nationalism’ --- a euphemism for anti-pluralistic, unitary cultural dominance of the majority community.

The election was contested in an atmosphere of shameless and hitherto unknown lumpenism displayed by the ABVP. So much so that its own activists openly clashed among themselves over the question of their candidature they claimed on the basis of caste, region and cultural background. The challenge before the entire student community, and more so before the UDF, was to ensure that the elections took place in a peaceful, free and fair manner, on the basis of principles and ideology, and that electoral manipulations must not hold sway. At last, the Left candidate won in the election on a thumping note.

AFTER THE ELECTION

It is known that student politics in a large part of the country is mired in caste, gender, region, community and other issues that are very often used, abused and misused for narrow ends. Attempts were made to use these issues in the HCU as well, but failed.

After the elections too, the students union sought to focus on various issues facing the HCU students in particular and by the common mass in general, including parents. However, the university administration persisted in its old ways and continued to take autocratic decisions in the matters of students’ interest without seeking the views of the student union. Thus the elected union could not but wage a fight against the administration. The union representatives came out openly against the administration’s dictatorial attitude and boycotted the meetings to which they were invited in a sham show of democratic consultation.

The situation worsened when the administration rusticated a foreign student from Tajikistan, who was doing MA in political science, without a proper inquiry and through an unjust procedure. The said student was asked to vacate the hostel and leave the campus immediately. The allegation levelled by the university authorities was that the dean of students welfare, chief warden and warden had seen a girl with him in the hostel veranda, and that while visiting the hostel they had recovered cooking utensils from his room. The university kept the said student in custody for two days for fear of students’ reaction, and kept the other students in dark about the issue.

There was yet another development provoking the student union to react. There was a placement cell in the university for the students of professional courses, but it was not functioning from a long time. Moreover, this year the cell appeared to have become defunct because of an inefficient, puppet placement officer. In fact, no company visited the campus in the last academic year for making on-the-spot recruitments. Naturally, the student union representatives asked the authorities to intimate them about the activities of the cell.

The union took both these issues with the university authorities and demanded revocation of the Tajik student’s rustication as well as removal of the placement officer. However, the university administration did not listen to the demands raised by the student union.

The student union had, therefore, no option but to give a protest call so as to fight the anti-student orientation of the HCU administration. There was mass support for the protest that took place on October 21. The protest started with a rally from the Social Science Block to the Administrative Block of the university, and around 300 students sat on a dharna.

As is being told by some of the old employees, it was the first movement led by a student union in the history of the HCU.

However, as has been its wont, the administration tried to suppress the agitation and, instead of holding any negotiations with the union, called police to the campus. The acting vice chancellor refused to listen to the students’ demands and deal with the issues in a friendly manner. In its stead, he asked the students to “get out of the Administrative Block.” This attitude compelled the students under the leadership of student union to go in for an indefinite hunger strike. The elected president, vice president, joint secretary and cultural secretary sat on the hunger strike.

After three days of hunger strike, the administration felt compelled to come down and fulfil the demands made by the student union, including the revocation of the said student’s rustication. An inquiry was also instituted on the issue of the placement officer’s removal. Further, the administration asked for time regarding some other demands. In case the administration fails to fulfil these demands, the student union says it is ready to run an uncompromising agitation against the administration till the demands are fulfilled.

Another unique feature of the strike was that the entire community of university employees and their organisations extended solidarity to the student union. The success achieved by this strike is bound to serve as a source of inspiration for the future movements of not only students but also of employees in the campus, against the policies of the administration and the government.

This year, the ABVP came out in its true anti-student colour. However, in the backdrop of the right-wing reactionary onslaught, the Left and democratic movement in the HCU campus under the SFI-led broad-based UDF has decided to continue its struggle to build and strengthen a secular, progressive and democratic ethos in the campus. It has also decided to forge and maintain the students’ unity in the campus.