NU ‘no’ to info on pvt agencies, registrar ads and exams

Times of India: Nagpur: Sunday, 23 February 2020.

The Nagpur University (NU) has refused to place before the senate the information regarding appointment of private agencies, expenses incurred on registrar post advertisements, data on results and revaluation claims in the last five years during the upcoming meeting on March 6.

Senate member Sarita Nimbarte had forwarded a list of nine questions regarding the above issues in her letter to the NU on February 6.

Replying to Nimbarte on February 20, the NU administration categorically refused to place the information on record citing “confidentiality, disruption to general administration, doubtful and unspecified” as reasons as per common statutes issued by higher and technical education department last year. The questions were rejected by vice-chancellor SP Kane.

The NU had been reluctant to part with information on the pretext of similar reasons even under the Right to Information (RTI) Act. In many cases, the RTI applicants dragged it to state information commission before the NU was ordered to provided information.

Nimbarte said the issues she is trying to raise can’t be called confidential in nature but only attempts to fix accountability and bring “misdoings” in public. She categorized her queries into three parts on invovlement of private firm Promarc in NU functioning, NU’s failure in appointing a full-time registrar despite spending on advertisements, selection process and examinations.

The first three questions on private companies, if any, and Promarc don’t suggest any breach of confidentiality as she restricted them to knowing names of the NU departments where they were appointed. Regarding Promarc, she asked how many works have been assigned to the private agency while the NU has never disclosed its dealings with it.

She also sought the copy of MoU, if any, signed with Promarc. The agency has occupied a big space at the NU exam section. The last question in this category is whether any space has been allotted to Promarc.

On registrar’s appointment, Nimbarte raised questions which are likely to bring to fore the NU’s expenses incurred and the status of the recruitment process even as it is unable to take the process further.

The queries on exam, she said, should ideally have been available on the website but for reasons best known to NU officials, these were kept “confidential”.

“This is nothing but an arbitrary administration in-charge of a public institution. If not these, then which questions should we ask? The university must answer these questions but they say don’t ask questions which will pose problems for the vice-chancellor and Promarc. Why should we not ask questions concerning students and public at large? Is there anything bigger than Kohchade scam which the university is trying to hide?” asked Nimbarte.