TNN,
Bangalore Edition, 09th July 2008
New Delhi: Shortly after okaying
the 27% OBC quota in admissions to educational institutions
albeit with the creamy layer rider, the Supreme Court on
Tuesday decided to examine the validity of the Centre’s
decision to extend identical reservation to senior faculty
posts in institutes of excellence.
Buoyed by the success in the apex court to sustain its affirmative
action for OBCs in college admissions, the HRD ministry
had asked all government and aided institutes like IITs
and other universities to implement 27% quota in faculty
posts, a decision that has invited strong criticism from
various alumni.
A PIL by NGO ‘Citizens for Equality’, moved
through counsel Gopal Shankarnarayan, voiced concern over
loss of academic excellence before a bench comprising Chief
Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justices P Sathasivam and J
M Panchal. The bench sought responses of HRD ministry and
University Grants Commission (UGC) within three weeks.
Appearing for the petitioner NGO, senior advocate K K Venugopal
argued that the application of reservations at the entry
level of teaching staff, that is the posts of lecturer,
was in practice, but the decision to extend the quota to
the posts of associate professor and professor was sure
to spell doom for institutes of excellence like Jawaharlal
Nehru University (JNU).
He said the posts of associate professor and professor should
be filled only on merit and any deviation from ‘merit
only’ criteria for these posts would severely compromise
the educational excellence for which India was known world
over.
Giving an example, Venugopal said professors who supervise
doctoral thesis require high educational capability and
promoting a person to such a post only on the basis of backwardness
would spell doom for the institute and on a longer run the
educational system in India.
Implementing reservation to higher posts among teaching
staff ‘‘would not only be a gross breach of
the principles of equality, but would also grievously harm
the high standards of education that is maintained at the
elite institutes’’, he said.
Though the petition had challenged the reservation for even
SCs and STs to posts of professors and associate professors,
the court agreed to examine the Centre’s decision
only with regard to quota in higher teaching posts for OBCs.
Can
govt change Diwali date?
New
Delhi: Can a government pass a law telling the citizens
that Diwali be celebrated in the month of January instead
of the month it traditionally falls on? This question was
asked by K R ‘Traffic” Ramaswami as he challenged
in the Supreme Court a Tamil Nadu law declaring January
14 as the Tamil New Year day, which traditionally is celebrated
on the first day of the Tamil month ‘Chithirai’,
which normally falls in mid-April. He also questioned the
Madras High Court’s decision to dismiss the PIL with
a cost of Rs 10,000.
The SC Bench said the PIL was dismissed as, at that time,
the decision was at the draft stage. “Now that the
Bill has been enacted as law, the petitioner can challenge
it in the HC,” the Bench said and also waived the
cost.
