Published: 25th January 2022
JNU Teachers Association take up Caretaker VC's case once again. Question the year-long delay in appointment of full-time VC
They have also lodged their complaint against the VC's failure to 'reward' the faculty with additional earned leaves for working without any break over the past two years
The JNU Teachers' Association (JNUTA) on Tuesday, January 25, questioned the delay in the appointment of the new Vice-Chancellor of the university a year after the previous head's tenure ended.
"In the university system, the position of the Vice-Chancellor is an important one. Yet it has been over a year now that JNU, one of the premier universities of the country, has been functioning without a full-time Vice-Chancellor. Several other Central Universities that had a similar vacancy have had new appointees. What then explains the delay in the case of JNU?" the association said in a statement.
Currently, M Jagadesh Kumar, who has been the Vice-Chancellor since 2016, is holding the charge as Acting VC, till the Ministry of Education appoints his successor.
"Directives issued by the Ministry of Education and provisions of JNU's own statutes explicitly forbid Vice-Chancellors whose tenures are formally over from taking decisions on policy matters of a substantive nature. Yet, important decisions related to policy matters are being pushed through by the Caretaker Vice-Chancellor, without any discussion, that has far-reaching consequences for JNU in the longer run," the teachers' association alleged.
"On the teaching front, while the university moved to online teaching during the pandemic, despite several requests there was no financial help provided to the faculty for purchase of teaching aids by the university," they added.
The teachers also claimed that no institutional subscription was provided to the faculty for online meeting platforms where bigger classes could be easily accommodated.
JNUTA has for long now protested against the Caretaker VC and in the recent calls for his replacement, they have claimed that Kumar did not act on the issues raised by the association.