The Arun
Nigvekar committee was constituted with a purpose. We are witness to the fact
that Delhi University has failed to devise a logical way to implement the
promotional scheme proposed and recommended in the sixth pay revision. Teachers
of this university have been stranded without promotions for almost the last
decade. When it was felt that the provisions of sixth pay recommendations with
regard to promotions are primarily encouraging pseudo-research and promoting
mushrooming of fake publications, the UGC decided to constitute this committee.
When it was established beyond all doubts that the API-PBAS scheme is spelling
disaster in the field of higher education, this committee was constituted to
suggest ways to arrest the declining standards in research activities as a
result of this faulty promotional scheme. When teachers began to feel that in
order to secure promotions, they needed to give less importance to their
teaching assignments and more to the activities that can lead to score API
points, they were forced to engaged in all such activities that promised them
to somehow accumulate these points. And the committee came into existence only
when it became more than clear that for whatever purpose the API-PBAS system
was invented, it had got completely defeated.
The Nigvekar Committee
was given the assignment of addressing a specific issue but for some reasons it
seems to have lost its direction and purpose completely. Instead of its report opening
a debate on the new system of scoring points for promotions, teachers are now
being compelled to agitate on the inexplicable increase in their workload as a
result of recommendations of this very committee. While proposing the new scheme
of scoring points, the Arun Nigvekar Committee appears to have attached an appendix
to the document and a few explanations therein that are found to be completely
unacceptable from all point of views. The increase in the workload as indicated
in the UGC Gazette Notification 2016 is a prescription of disaster for the
higher education. No government in its right senses can think of increasing
workload almost by fifty percent! With one stroke, no government would have dared
to leave almost half of the teaching strength with no choice but to come on the
streets. How couldn’t they speculate the damage done by such a notification
that is bound to leave teachers with nothing more to lose further? Don’t they
understand that sudden loss of job for a sizable lot of teachers will be the
direct result of implementation of this draconian notification?
Wasn’t that stupid to assume that such a massive increase of workload would not stir up the teaching community? Was that difficult to speculate the unrest that it has caused in the university system? Anyone could have predicted complete unanimity among teachers on issues of bread and butter. Who, on earth, has found the complete boycott of evaluation work as surprising? How could one assume that even after all the adhoc teachers are left with no other option but to agitate, they would keep quite? Was that sane to expect teachers to offer their neck when the gazette exposes the shining sword to axe their livelihood? Tell me who can extract any positive from this third amendment without seeing the writing on the wall?
I can smell a rat in this. There is something that is hidden more than what appears exposed in the open. I would refuse to reject the possibility of a game of mischief played by political players to suit their politics. Those who were trying hard to find an issue to mobilize against this government have been awarded the same with this UGC Gazette notification.In fact asking complete withdrawal of this notification would be an incomplete demand to accept even from the government’s perspective. To save the government from further such unnecessary embarrassments, they must investigate how it came to this stage in the first place. There is no alternative – instead of firing half of the teaching community – they must fix up responsibility of this obvious and unpardonable lapse immediately and fire all of them summarily.
Wasn’t that stupid to assume that such a massive increase of workload would not stir up the teaching community? Was that difficult to speculate the unrest that it has caused in the university system? Anyone could have predicted complete unanimity among teachers on issues of bread and butter. Who, on earth, has found the complete boycott of evaluation work as surprising? How could one assume that even after all the adhoc teachers are left with no other option but to agitate, they would keep quite? Was that sane to expect teachers to offer their neck when the gazette exposes the shining sword to axe their livelihood? Tell me who can extract any positive from this third amendment without seeing the writing on the wall?
I can smell a rat in this. There is something that is hidden more than what appears exposed in the open. I would refuse to reject the possibility of a game of mischief played by political players to suit their politics. Those who were trying hard to find an issue to mobilize against this government have been awarded the same with this UGC Gazette notification.In fact asking complete withdrawal of this notification would be an incomplete demand to accept even from the government’s perspective. To save the government from further such unnecessary embarrassments, they must investigate how it came to this stage in the first place. There is no alternative – instead of firing half of the teaching community – they must fix up responsibility of this obvious and unpardonable lapse immediately and fire all of them summarily.
