Bedlam in SGU senate meet

The question-answer session saw members seeking trivia and losing time on discussions that were eminently avoidable. One had to plough through a verbiage of supplementary questions to know the original question. No wonder even the Senators lost track of the question and often aired advice or giving speeches.

Even the stock reply from the chair was notice ni jarur chhe led to a dual between rival members. Suryakant Shah was accused of doubting the integrity of the university — something he let out accidentally while being engaged in a battle of wits with Rasesh Shukla — for his remark tame kai chhupavva mago chho (you want to hide something).

A member came up with a novel idea of playing the recorded version of the proceedings to establish truth and was even backed by the vice-chancellor, before another shot it down saying a wrong precedent will be set. Despite provocation from certain quarters, Sharda closed the matter saying, “I presume the member did not utter the word.”

However, it was the ongoing tussle between the centralised admission committee for B.Ed — headed by Shah — and the university that saw acrimonious scenes. The anti-Shah group, which holds a majority, first successfully moved an adjournment motion to pass a resolution against the committee for 1998-99. It may be mentioned that Shah has refused to part with admission literature despite being asked to submit it to the Syndicate in the wake of complaints of largescale irregularities in the admission procedure.

The resolution empowered the vice-chancellor to take a suitable action against the committee convener and the chairperson after condemning the adamant on their part. The final resolution deleted the words “disciplinary/criminal proceedings.” The resolution was passed (41 for 12 against while 10 did not vote) after a couple of members asked for division (secret ballot).

Vice-chairman of Bar Council of Gujarat and senator Hoshang Mirza said the resolution was illegal. Not only had the discussion on the motion extended by 12 minutes than the stipulated time of 60 minutes, there was simply no provision to pass a resolution. He claimed he would challenge the resolution in the Gujarat High Court.

Shukla’s insinuation that Shah was chor also lost considerable time of the meeting before order was restored. He later came down heavily on Shah and his camp followers for what he called “negative attitude” towards self-financing colleges.

Despite the clearcut division along political affiliations, the members told each other to “rise above narrow political goals and work towards the betterment of the university and in the interest of students” during the discussion that followed after Prof Ashwin Desai submitted the annual report for 1997-98.