People's Democracy(Weekly Organ of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) |
Vol. XXXVII
No. 14 April 07, 2013 |
TAMILNADU Corruption
in S P Rajendran NEARLY 12,000
teaching
and non-teaching staff of It is the
multi-crore
corruption scams as well as an anti-employee policy of the
management that have
pushed the entire teaching and non-teaching community to the
war-path in order
to save this esteemed institution. Leaders of
the JAC say
their primary demand is that the pro-chancellor, M A M
Ramaswamy, must should
be removed from the post and that the higher education
minister of the state
appointed in his place. At present,
3,000
teachers and 9,400 non-teaching members are working in the Right from
the year
2000, due to increases in the student strength,
necessitating new appointments,
the number of teachers and non-teaching staffs has also gone
up in the
university. At present, some 30,000 students are pursuing
their studies through
on-campus programmes while 4,50,000 students are enrolled in
the distance mode.
However, the teachers’ associations expressed their
opposition when the
management started to appoint the teaching and non-teaching
staff unscrupulously.
Teachers and their associations opposed the limitless
appointments even in the Academic
Council meetings and at other forums, while conducting
agitations outside. It has also
been learnt
that, depending upon the nature of the posts and the basic
pay they carry,
agents of the management have been extorting Rs 5,00,000 to
Rs 45,00,000 as
bribe for appointments. Whenever the associations opposed
these unethical
postings, the authorities tried to silence the teachers on
the plea that “it is
the headache of the management, and you will be given full
salary forever.” All of a
sudden, however,
the vice chancellor called all the associations on November
7, 2012, and
announced that the university was in a financial crisis, as
a result whereof the
university would be forced to go in for staff retrenchment
or salary reduction
or both. But the Joint Action Council firmly opposed this
decision and pointed
out that neither the teachers nor the non- teaching members
were responsible
for the financial crisis; rather it was the pro-chancellor
who was solely
responsible for it as he had been making appointments
without any limit. Then, during
the
Syndicate meeting on November 16, 2012, when the JAC was
staging a protest
action outside the meeting’s venue, the vice chancellor
assured that the
syndicate had decided not to reduce salaries or retrench
anyone. However, the
management did not take any measure to set the financial
position of the
university right. The
accusation
levelled by the JAC is that agents of the management have
been swindling Rs 300
crore per year on an average, in the name of donations from
the students. So
far, they have illegally got Rs 7,800 crore as bribes for
appointments and as donations. To salvage
the situation,
the JAC has put forth the following demands: (1) There
must be
neither salary reduction nor retrenchment at any cost. (2) All
benefits due to
the university teachers and employees must continue at par
with other universities. (3) The
pro-chancellorship
should be given to the higher education minister of
Tamilnadu. (4) An
enquiry commission
must be constituted to probe the corruption by the
management. It was in
this context
that the JAC organised the protest fast across the whole
state of Tamilnadu. Its
office bearers say the university is still continuing with
its anti-employee
policy, and denying the rightful benefits to teachers and
other staff. It had
stopped paying the Pongal bonus, dearness allowance arrears,
leave encashment
and so on. It is also refusing regularisation of services of
the staff. All
these anomalies could be sorted out only with the immediate
intervention of the
state government, they said. The JAC has
also asked
the government to initiate criminal proceedings against
those involved in malpractices
and other such unsavoury activities. The All India
Federation of University and College Teachers' Organisations
(AIFUCTO) extended
support to the cause of the SPECIAL AUDIT Earlier, a
special
audit ordered by the state government following the staff
unrest and financial
crisis in Annamalai University had unearthed large scale
irregularities,
malpractices and mismanagement in the university’s affairs. One shocking
revelation made by the audit report is that contributions to
provident fund and
pension funds amounting to Rs 178 crore had not been
remitted into the
respective accounts. Further, the university authorities
have diverted Rs 268
crore from the General Fund, Examination Fund and Distance
Education Fund to
run the self-financing courses which are supposed to be
self-sufficient. The
government had
ordered the special audit under provisions of the Annamalai
University Act. Other key
audit
findings were as below: the university has not adhered to
the UGC or government
norms or statutory provisions regarding appointment,
promotion and fixation of
pay, often fixing far higher scales of pay than permissible.
The recurring
financial burden as a result for 2009-10 and 2010-11 alone
was Rs 22 crore. It
incurred excess expenditure amounting to Rs 109.98 crore in
2010-11 alone, by
way of extra posts under regular education, distance
education and
self-financing courses, and a cumulative superfluous
spending of Rs 576.35
crore. Violations of
the
Tender Transparency Act, which is applicable to the
university, were also noticed.
Between 2008 and 2012, construction work was mostly awarded
to the Chettinad
Builders at rates much above the estimates. The lack of an
internal mechanism
to oversee the financial transactions has led to an overall
deficit of Rs 272
crore in the last 15 years and to liabilities amounting to
Rs 238 crore. Following a
detailed
inspection report, the higher education secretary of the
state then sent a
letter to the It was in
this
background that a special meeting of the university’s Senate
was held on March
13. Members of the Joint Action Council and several others,
including K Balakrishnan,
MLA from Chidambaram constituency and a Central Committee
member of the CPI(M),
and vice chancellors of other universities and government
officials,
recommended that the university must be brought under the
government’s control.