Itanagar: Allegations of legal violations in APU VC selection, probe launched
ITANAGAR: The process for appointing the vice-chancellor (VC) of Arunachal Pradesh University (APU) in Pasighat (E/Siang) has come under scrutiny after it emerged that the constitution of the search-cum-selection committee may be at variance with the provisions of the Arunachal Pradesh University Act, 2012.
The selection process has already commenced, with personal interactions of candidates having been conducted on 17 June.
This daily has learnt that, even as the search-cum-selection committee has come under scrutiny, a panel of four candidates has been shortlisted following the interactions.
The panel reportedly includes two candidates from Rajiv Gandhi University and one each from the NERIST and the NEHU. There are also apprehensions that at least two indigenous academicians from Rajiv Gandhi University were overlooked despite possessing all the prescribed qualifications and meeting the eligibility requirements.
At the centre of the controversy is the inclusion of the education secretary/commissioner as a member of the search-cum-selection committee. It has been alleged that the official, being an ex-officio member of both the university court and the executive council, was statutorily disqualified from serving on the committee under the Arunachal Pradesh University Act, 2012.
Questions have also been raised over the appointment of the chief secretary as the chairman of the committee, with concerns that the presence of senior state administrative officials could compromise the independence envisaged under the statutory framework governing the appointment of a vice-chancellor.
The conduct of the selection process has also come under the scanner following the rescheduling of the candidates’ interaction from 16 June to 17 June, which allegedly resulted in the absence of the University Grants Commission (UGC) nominee. It is being contended that proceedings in the absence of a UGC representative diluted the independent academic oversight envisaged under the Act.
Another issue that has surfaced relates to the executive council’s nominee to the committee. Allegations have been made that the original nominee of the executive council may have been replaced without authority. If established, such a substitution could have implications for the legality of the committee’s constitution.
It has been contended that the alleged statutory irregularities strike at the very constitution of the search-cum-selection committee, rendering the entire selection process legally vulnerable. Failing corrective action, the matter is likely to be taken before the court.
