Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Objects that can’t Object

‘Let the rule of law prevail’ – is this true only for teachers who reacted with only a seven-day strike in installments during a period beginning from 16th July to 30th October, in response to a barrage of letters hurled from the registrar’s office aimed at humiliating teachers who had engaged themselves in saving their dignity and also what they perceive as soul of the higher (non-professional) education. Are we required to shed our right to participate in a process that decides what and how to teach, under the threat of salary cuts? Are we being told that university rules are not that are written in the rule-book but it is the orders of those whom they consider to be the ‘authorities’?
The only mistake the teachers made was that they felt they are part of the education system itself and not mere external instruments for helping just another system, controlled by others, to function. Mr. Justice, teachers were the ones who wanted only the rule of law to prevail and not the University ‘officials’ (not defined as ‘authorities’ in our rule-book), who kept on issuing illegal orders. We are covinced that our University officials can think of destroying this temple of learning by using this as a ladder for achieving personal gains in their life outside the university but we would always like to preserve this and feel pride in considering this to be our sole duty.
We can never imagine of a teacher ‘Dronacharya’ advising Draupadi to have first abided by the orders of ‘Duryodhan’; to have cooperated with 'Duhshasan' in helping him execute the orders by allowing him to make her sit on Duryodhan’s lap after shedding her clothes, before filing a suit and waited for ‘Dhritrashtra’ to have termed the order eventually as illegal. Lots of lives lost in 'Mahabhrata Yuddha' could have been saved had she let the then rule of law to prevail. History has not forgiven Dronacharya for even being a mute witness to a blatant immoral and highly unpardonable act of his 'authorities'. Can our court suggest that a member of ‘Haryana Lawn Tennis Association’, Ruchitra Gehrotra, should have followed the orders of her authority, the founding president of the association, Mr. SPS Rathore? She should have cooperated in her molestation as she had no right to deprive India of many winning medals in the sport? She could have gone to the court afterwards to know whether SPS Rathore’s advances were legal or not as no one else has a right to know or interpret the law.
I am just hoping that these queries will be answered in the final verdict to be delivered on December 13. Only the final verdict will hint whether the teachers made a mistake of not approaching the courts or not. In this era of privatisation, are we supposed to behave as mere objects that cannot object?

4 comments:

Dhananjay said...

I think the justices who passed the order are old enough to have been in school when corporal punishment was legal in our education system. And I suspect that they were not beaten up enough in their growing up stage or else they would not have given this order.

Naveen Gaur said...

I agree with you again !!

But I don't think that much is expected from the final verdict on 13 Dec. The previous order of HC has already set the tone.

It's unfortunate that court gave such a biased order. They didn't even look at the fact that DU teachers protested not for their own personal gains (salary etc) which is generally the case. But this time the protests were to save the sanctity of the system. They (courts) completely ignored (at least so far) the facts that DU officials (note VCs and Registrar are supposed to served DU and hence are officials) made the mockery of the system whereas the people (teachers) who have stake in the system tried to prevent the sanctity of University.

It is a big shock for me to see that court order says "how can teachers not teach what administration directs??".

Anurag Mishra said...

You have a point in your article. But, the time has now changed. It is not 1980s now. At present, in this system, everyone thinks for future and personal gains. So, one should not feel astonished by this order. As the HC bench had given the provision of future judicial review of the ordinance passed under emergency powers, they are least concerned about whether they are doing justice at present or not. This has been done with a view as stated above under the garb of welfare of students. What would happen to the students, if later the HC bench itself declares the ordinance ultra-vires. In this world, every one thinks of immediate gains and this is prevalent in judiciary also. That is the reason, that even justice system has not remained a sacrosant system. Even the benches do have guts to counter the illegalities of the state. We should think of our future strategy which will bring us out of this confusion and mess.

Dr. Rakesh Kumar Pandey said...

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Naveen Jain
Date: Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 4:02 PM
Subject: Re: new blog - "objects that can't object"
To: rakesh pandey
Cc: pandeymaneesha@gmail.com, Inder Mohan Kapahy , Manoj Khanna



Dear Dr Rakesh JI

VERY THANKS AND CONGRATULATIONS FOR SUCH A THOUGHT PROVOKING ARTICLE.
I agree with your valid logic and example but have to be presented this kind of viewpoint before or on the 13th of Dec in the court. By mere getting convinced the we teachers about illegality and injustice would not serve the purpose for the students AND is not enough in the court.
But through teacher body we should be able to defend our case with more of such type of examples and clarity in the court to whom the DU officials are bound to listen.
I am not of the opinion that we are not object who can not object any thing illegal at least in INDIA. If any one is feeling being deprive of such right the one of the judge very bluntly objected to the teachers behavior for not challenging the legality till date in the court and objecting to it by taking law in their hand taking the career of the large no of students at the stake.
Either accept the illegal system or object about it in the court in the legal manner.
we should hope now that the policy maker of we teachers association (LEGAL EXPERT COMMITTEE) will frame a strategy which will not fail on 13th. Otherwise I am of the opinion that DUTA was very sucessful on 15th NOV and judges are forced by DUTA Lawer to take up the illegality of the semester system on the next date for final disposal of the case.

I have seen that every one is working very hard from the heart and united. Lets this uniity prevail in just announced AC/ EC Elections and we teachers send our representative by consensus not by the votting. WE ARE UNITED AND WE SHOULD PROJECT OUR SELVES UNITED IN AT LEAST NEXT COMING ELECTIONS.

Looking for the this kind of high rated article from your side in future too

Warm regards

N K JAIN