The Telegraph
 
 
IN TODAY'S PAPER
CITY NEWSLINES
 
 
ARCHIVES
Since 1st March, 1999
 
THE TELEGRAPH
 
 
Email This Page
Another scandal scalds Dilip

Calcutta, June 28: Dilip Kumar Sinha is in deeper trouble and Mukti Deb has little to do with the new twist.

A commission has concluded that the former vice-chancellor of Visva-Bharati acted in “deliberate defiance of the provisions of law” and went “out of the way” to grant affiliation to outside institutions.

The disclosure comes in the middle of an unfolding scandal that has led to the arrest of Sinha for alleged involvement in appointing Deb a lecturer on the basis of fake marksheets. Deb, too, has been arrested.

The one-man committee of Justice Malay Sengupta, a former judge of Calcutta High Court, had probed affiliation granted by the university to 40 institutions during Sinha’s tenure as vice-chancellor.

The committee’s unpublicised report, a copy of which is with The Telegraph, said several norms laid down in an ordinance were flouted while giving affiliation to the 40 institutions, 19 of which were dropped later.

Highlighting one of the violations, the report pointed out that only four of the 40 institutions were registered under the prescribed act — a basic requirement for affiliation. The report also accused Sinha of keeping his “eyes shut towards statutory provisions”.

CID officials probing the appointment case held a series of meetings today on the report that will form a key tool of the probe against Sinha.

The 14-page sealed document was submitted to the current vice-chancellor, Sujit Kumar Basu, on March 14, eleven days before the Nobel theft rocked the varsity. Basu had earlier said that the report had indicted Sinha but refused to elaborate.

The report said it appeared that an attempt was made later by Sinha in “hot haste” to set right the violations. When Sinha was about to lay down office, he formed a panel that suggested “liberalisation” of the prescribed structure, according to the report.

It said the move could not be “appreciated” as the ordinance could be changed only through a formal amendment and not by “recommendation by any committee”.

Besides, the report said, “there is nothing on record to show that the ordinance was ever modified…. Moreover, it is too big a pill to swallow that by way of amendment all the irregularities committed earlier would be ratified with retrospective effect”.

The report also throws light on the former registrar, Dwijadas Banerjee, now in judicial custody in connection with the theft of manuscripts.

“The then registrar Shri Dwijadas Banerjee, the deputy registrar Shri Sudhir Mukherjee … do not appear to have properly guided the vice-chancellor in this respect and like most obedient servants, they acted as yes boys and endorsed whatever the vice-chancellor was doing…,” the report added.

Top
Email This Page