JSCC gives detailed account to MU impasse-II
Source: The Sangai Express

Imphal, October 21 2016: It was around this time that a student body christened Manipur University Scheduled Caste Students' Welfare Association was formed and they started exerting due pressure on the VC, Registrar and Chancellor of the varsity to enforce the CEI (Reservation in admission) Act, 2006 .

Numerous memorandawere submitted and the students' body even approached the High Court and the National Commission for Scheduled Caste.

The High Court duly served a legal notice to MU and the National Commission for Scheduled Caste also sent a written missive to the Registrar of MU, said JSCC.

Following this, MU adopted the CEI (Reservation in admission) Act of 2006 and admitted students to PhD programmes under this Act from 2009, said JSCC.

This continued till 2013 and the tribal students raised a huge protest against this, said the statement and added that it was to address this that a campus of Indira Gandhi Tribal University was set up in Manipur.

On the other hand before the CEI Act of 2006 was implemented there was seat reservation for OBC, said JSCC and added after the CEI 2006 Act was enforced, 27 pc was kept aside for OBC candidates.

Accordingly, infrastructure development and absorption in the faculty post for OBC was also kept at 27 pc for OBC at MU.

However if the OBC reservation is slashed to 17 pc as per the 2012 Amendment Act, does this mean that the 10 pc reduction too will impact on the those who were inducted earlier according to the 27 pc, asked JSCC.

This should be made clear to the public, said the statement.

After the CEI Amendment Act of 2012 came, many teachers of MU and others dissected the new Act and it is obvious that the provisions and clauses of the 2012 Amendment Act cannot be understood alone but should be seen in the context of the parent Act which is the CEI Act of 2006 .

After a lot of discussion and brain racking sessions, it was concluded that the CERI Act of 2012 was not applicable in MU and the 2014 Academic Council of MU took the decision to stick to the reservation norms laid down in the CEI 2006 Act for admission during the 2014-15 academic session, said JSCC.

Former VC of MU Prof C Amuba also wrote an article in The Sangai Express (English edition) on August 7, 2014 going into the details of the CEI 2012 Amendment Act.

In July 2014, the then Governor of Manipur wrote to the Registrar and Executive Officer of MU asking why the CEI 2012 Amendment Act is not followed in the admission process to MU.

Following this the Registrar of MU along with the VC, legal advisor and some officials of the varsity worked out a State reservation norm taking into account the strength of the students in some hostels and some departments, said JSCC .

In its intimation to the Rector after taking the charter of demands of the ST students into consideration, MU said 'For the academic year 2014-15, as per the gazette notification dated 20th June, 2012 Central Educational Institutions (Reservation in admission) Amendment Act 2012 stipulates that reservation norms in Central Education Institutions in tribal inhabited States of North East India including Manipur be as per State Government norms' .

This is something which was not at all mentioned in the CEI 2012 Amendment Act, pointed out the joint student body.

JSCC also questioned whether MU stands in a tribal area or not and added that the land where MU stands today was donated by people from Langthabal, Kyamgei, Thongju, Naorem Leikai, Maibam Leikai etc.

Now can one say that all these areas now come under tribal area ? asked JSCC.

After spelling out the details of the history of the row over the reservation percentage in admission to MU, JSCC laid down some points for all to ponder over.

Will all agree with the observation that Manipur University stands in a tribal area, asked JSCC and asked whether anyone will agree if a reservation Act of Manipur Government, which is not there at all, be applied in admission to MU.

JSCC also asked the people to take a decision on who should be held responsible for the acts of arson inside MU campus, the loss of an academic year for the students, erosion of moral values of the students.

The former VC and Registrar should apologise to the people for misleading the Governor by furnishing information which were not at all included in the Amendment Act of 2012 .

Comment