3 associations oppose Prof Srivastava’s move to amend university’s statute

Syllad | The Rising MeghalayaDecember 7, 2020

Three associations on Monday opposed the move of the NEHU vice chancellor Prof SK Srivastava to amend statute of the university to extend his term of office.

This was alleged in a joint statement issued by the Meghalaya Tribal Teachers’ Association (MeTTA), North-Eastern Hill University Teachers’ Association (NEHUTA) and Meghalaya Confederation for Academic Welfare (MeCAW).

“We oppose such a move to amend statute by Prof Srivastava by bringing to academic council. We also bring this to the notice of higher authorities to stop such illegal acts of statute amendment by a caretaker VC,” the statement said.

It said Prof Srivastava is grossly misusing continuance in his office to amend an important statute of the central university that may extend his term of office.

“As the process of selection of the new VC is on, such patently unstatutory, illegal and immoral act of proposing to amend University’s statute 2(A) (2) that concerns with extension of the term of office of the incumbent VC under the specific direction of the Visitor maximum up to one year or until the new VC joins, whichever is earlier”.

The statement said the apparent intent behind proposing to amend the statute is to benefit himself of another extension, if an amendment is allowed to that effect by University’s academic council.

“Such an act of amending a statute that concerns office of the term extended VC himself is a grave conflict of interest, which is not only untenable from the statutory perspective, but it is a grave act of impropriety when a caretaker or term extended VC cannot use any ‘statutory powers’ as stated in letter from erstwhile MHRD dated 7th August, 2014. The said letter clearly stated that “an officer appointed to perform current duties of an appointment can exercise administrative or financial power but he cannot exercise statutory powers, whether those powers are derived direct from an act of parliament,”it said.

According to the statement, Prof Srivastava is just permitted to hold his office and is not supposed to exercise any statutory power derived from NEHU Act, 1973.

Statutory powers vested on a regular VC does not apply on a post holder, term expired VC who is permitted to continue to hold the office for a directed period conditionally such as Prof Srivastava.

“Yet by crossing all constitutional and legal laxman rekhas, in sheer abuse and misuse of his office, Prof Srivastava intends to chair meetings of statutory councils and even go to the extent of changing statutes of the University.

Along with all his grave violations of University’s Act, statute, ordinances etc he is indulging into one more serious violation that has the potential to extend his term. Such double impropriety and consequent damage to the academic and administrative fabric of the university is a serious matter that cannot be allowed,” it said.

It further stated that the poor excuse that Prof Srivastava took while proposing amendment to the statute is to refer to some other universities and bring NEHU statute at par with other central universities.

Question is, can a term expired VC take such a policy decision with a long term effect especially when Govt of India had asked the VC’s performing duties of an appointment to strictly follow such a restriction of not using any statutory powers, the statement said