Opportunity to Thank in Advance

[Updated on July 21 and July 26, 2013. Thanked in advance. Thank all stakeholders once again.]

Disclaimer : This is an attempt to give readers another side of the story published in newspapers on IIT Kharagpur which appears to me as ill-conceived or unbalanced. Readers are advised to read this as well as the original articles (link of every article referred to is provided) and have his/her own opinion. The post does not intend to harm any individual or institution but one is free to point if one finds anything objectionable. If justified, I shall act on that part on which objection, if any, is raised.

The newspapers are now flooded with articles on IIT Kharagpur Director appointment. I place here two of my comments to two ToI articles. One is published and one is not published even after several attempts and several hours. The one that is published is available in the comment section of the article, 'Headless' IIT-KGP to go on hunger strike on July 17, dated 13-7-2013 (Link). It is for those to defend the mode they take to make themselves heard - hunger strike etc.. To me, it so appeared that all need to take each other into confidence and the following was my prayer to clear the deadlock over the issue which is dragging for more than a year now and to me it is not helping in anyways.

I read in EFYtimes [Link] the following, "Prof. Chakrabarti’s appointment is pending CVC clearance. IIT Kharagpur’s Board of Governors has cleared Prof. Chakrabarti once in March 2012 and again in March 2013 of any wrongdoing. CVC is still holding on to the clearance due to unknown reasons, even though the CVC rules specify cases must be resolved within two months of filing a defense statement (CVC Guideline No. 000/VGL/18, dated 23rd May 2000)." Probably an RTI could have been filed why so and legal option would have been weighed if requests and representations failed (apparently so). Request MHRD not to misunderstand phrases like 'strong message to MHRD' etc. Please consider it as a kind of frustration and impatience after waiting for a year now. And where will one go to but the MHRD? Confrontation, may kindly be not seen as challenging the authority, but an attempt to make the voice heard which apparently is drowned. Apparently, MHRD is also waiting for signature from CVC which may come anytime soon. Request all stakeholders, MHRD, CVC, IIT community resolve it quickly and for the sake of the country. The tangles if any can be unwound quickly if all concerned exercise goodwill. Thousands of new UG, PG students are to join IIT Kharagpur now [also one full batch of outgoing students are getting placed in jobs and universities]. It does not give them and their parents [industry, other universities] confidence if the matters like Director appointment gets dragged like this. Request all to take each other into confidence for the sake of our love and confidence in this great institute and our nation. Thank you and kindly please, for the sake of all. - Purab

I thank ToI for publishing above comment and give space to readers like us. Today, ToI publishes another article titled, "IIT Kharagpur alumni demands immediate appointment of PP Chakraborty as director" (Link). This article has certain colour where the author instead of reporting facts as they are, apparently tries to muddle the issue further and make the issue more complicated than ever. He makes suggestion to MHRD, finds fault with MHRD etc. He says, "But the larger question is why did the ministry, instead of asking IIT-Kharagpur to start the selection process afresh, waited to give a clean chit to Chakraborty." He apparently finds it difficult to accept what he himself wrote, "Eventually, HRD ministry said "defence of Chakraborty can be accepted"." In between NDTV (Link) and other media reported that Honourable Minister is trying his best to expedite the director appointment. The following comment I tried to post in ToI today as reader's view which thankfully acknowledges the effort of MHRD, CVC and and how IITKGP should look forward and not allow director appointment issue to be a drag. But unfortunately, ToI does not publish this comment, even after showing successful posting (image attached). What is in it that the moderator found unacceptable, compared to other comments seen there? And I tried many times in different hours with same consequence. However, I could slip in one short comment which appears as anonymous(India) where a link to this post is given. 

The comment with links added as updates is pasted below. Thanks to all who are in love with this great institution of this nation and who help it to stay focused. 

Sincere thanks to MHRD to hear, "Eventually, HRD ministry said "defence of Chakraborty can be accepted"." The due diligence MHRD conducted has reached the conclusion which is welcomed heartily. This is also evident from the volume of the material evidence available in public domain now [Link]. Report elsewhere published says that MHRD has requested CVC to expedite, and that before 27th July the decision will possibly be reached [Link]. We understand that there may be procedure related issues, issues within issues (major vs. minor penalty), relationship of IITKGP board and CVC in such matters etc. This may have delayed the clearing of appointment of Prof. Chakraborty. But it is great to see that MHRD, CVC are not to drag the issue like director appointment of the prized institution for long (already one year is over) in the interest of the nation and IIT community that includes important stakeholders like alumni, collaborators from India and abroad, students and their parents and one may say that every citizen of this country who take pride in IIT system. Let MHRD, CVC debate, resolve other matters giving those items due time and consideration. Let not the 'minor penalty' person suffer the way he is made to suffer for last 5 years or more. The way he has been humiliated, torn in public without bothering that he too is a family man by attaching terms like 'scam', 'tainted', for months and years, all the while we find what comes as conclusion - that he had next to nothing to do with it and his 'defence can be accepted'. Can there be more penalty than what the person has already gone through for a conclusion like this? Isn't it that what he has gone through so far is much more than a 'minor penalty'? Isn't there any principle of natural justice to act urgently and decisively? I thank MHRD, CVC from bottom of my heart for exercising their goodwill and resolving the issue by indicating the conclusion they are reaching which will bring confidence back to the system - that performance counts, sacrifice for the country matters, love and respect one earns from one and all get recognized in this country. ToI group has published various article recently on this - by Jhimli Mukherjee Pandey & Sujay Khanra [July 18 Link], Subhro Niyogi [July 13 Link], Pran Kurup [July 18 Link], PTI [July 17 Link] and few others under TNN authorship (no specific name of author) [July 21 Link, July 21 Link2, July 21 Link3] ... This article and other articles by this particular author in the past has a colour of its own [Check Link1, Link2]. And it would be interesting to find if there had been a systematic attempt denigrate this great and loved institute, IIT Kharagpur or settling of personal score. But let that wait or be ignored, now that we see the main person behind Vision 20-20 announced by President of India in last IITKGP convocation [Link1, Link2], Prof. Chakraborty assuming charge soon, let IITKGP Community (faculty-students-alumni-collaborators) now focus their effort to reach the goals which President of the country has set and not allow such an issue be a drag. In hope and prayer, Purab

Update from July 21, 2013

Posted following comment in today's ToI article (Link) without being anonymous. Wonder why it is not getting published so that reader's opinion counts.

Thanks ToI for this article which reports facts as they are unlike what Mr. A Mukul tried to write in yesterday's article. As per ToI article of yesterday MHRD has said that "defence of Chakraborty can be accepted". Elsewhere it is reported that MHRD will appoint Director by 27th July. Sincere thanks to MHRD and CVC for listening to the voice of all stakeholders and indicating what we can expect soon. There might have been some complication for which there is this delay. Or there could be other cases to look into for which this did not get attention. Now those being matter of past, let us bury them and work together to take this great institute forward for which the first Prime Minister of independent India had this to say,  "Here in the place of that Hijli Detention Camp stands the fine monument of India, representing India's urges, India's future in the making. This picture seems to me symbolical of the changes that are coming to India."  For the sake of the nation, let us harness all our positive energy and move forward. Thanks to all. Let us stand by the incoming director who as MHRD indication goes will be Prof. Chakraborty. Ironically, Prof. Chakraborty  has already suffered much more than 'minor penalty' through media trial, public humiliation that used terms like 'scam', 'tainted' when the material available in public domain and conclusion reached by MHRD shows what had been his role. Let us put this debate to rest and show the world that "WE CAN". In prayer, Purab of purabspeaks [dot] blogspot [dot] in

-------
Update from 26.7.2013. A big THANKS to MHRD, CVC and all stakeholders.

Excerpts from ToI report [Link] published today.

After many months of wrangling P P Chakraborty has been finally cleared for the post of director at IIT-Kharagpur. The Central Vigilance Commission's (CVC) clearance came late on Thursday. The HRD ministry was under tremendous pressure fromIIT-Kharagpur alumni association and other industrial bigwigs to get go ahead for Chakraborty. On Saturday when the convocation takes place IIT-Kharagpur would finally have a director. 

This has been my comment to that article which does not appear yet [update: it appears for a change!] in the comment section.

It is better not to write "under tremendous pressure" and question the wisdom and capability of MHRD and CVC. Rather it should be seen as collective goodwill that was generated to get rid of the issue that was dragging for a year. Every stakeholder - MHRD, CVC, Alumni, Faculty, Collaborators, Students, Parents, People and above all TRUTH come as a winner. Warm congratulations to Prof. Chakraborty! A lot of expectation is built around him and IIT Kharagpur in public space. Let all stakeholders extend a helping hand to him and IIT Kharagpur. [It is no prize. It is greatest of the responsibility to lead an institutuin which epitomizes the aspiration of modern India.] May God grant Prof. Chakraborty the strength for he is taken up the cross. I had thanked in advance to all in my blogpost. Thank you once again. Let us work together to rebuild India and make our nation proud. In prayer, Purab of purabspeaks [dot] blogspot [dot] in

Another report published by Indian Express today [Link] says,

The Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) on Thursday finally gave the nod to the HRD Ministry to appoint Prof Partha Pratim Chakrabarti as director of IIT-Kharagpur. Top government sources said the CVC gave the professor a virtual clean chit in the Coalnet scam. Keeping in mind the minor penalty recommended against him, the CVC also asked the ministry to 'advise' the professor to be more careful in future.

Sources said the ministry will follow the CVC advice and formally appoint him as IIT-Kharagpur director. 

MHRD earlier accepted the defence of Prof. Chakraborty. CVC tells that Professor to be advised to be more careful in future. This is what has been pointed out in various posts of this blog in the the past contrary to some media people portraying Prof. Chakraborty as gory villain remaining blind to factual matters available in public domain. However, TRUTH wins.

Indian Express further reports that IIT Kharagpur has issued Memo now to other two persons named. This could be the missing link leading to procedure related delay at CVC end. One would have expected this matter not getting dragged to this extent, addressing issue sitting across the table taking each other into confidence. But let us not brood over the past. Let us take the learning points from this episode and move forward.

Thanks to All. 

The Pioneer Connection

Disclaimer : This is an attempt to give readers another side of the story published in newspapers on IIT Kharagpur which appears to me as ill-conceived or unbalanced. Readers are advised to read this as well as the original articles (link of every article referred to is provided) and have his/her own opinion. The post does not intend to harm any individual or institution but one is free to point if one finds anything objectionable. If justified, I shall act on that part on which objection, if any, is raised.

Today again IIT Kharagpur was in news for wrong reason. This was CVC recommendation on the 'Coalnet' project conducted by IIT Kharagpur for Coal India Limited (CIL). This assumes significance as Director-Elect's appointment apparently is withheld for clearance from CVC. Three Professors' name were doing round since 2007 where CBI recommended two for major penalty through regular departmental action (RDA) and one for minor penalty through RDA. The CBI report recommends action against GM(System) of CIL and TCG software company. The information available in public domain shows that GM(System) of CIL retired as CGM, a higher post with no penal action. There was no action against TCG. There was no action against two Prof.s recommended for major penalty where one becomes Director of another IIT. He did not need CVC clearance but the 'minor penalty' person needs. 

The person who appears to have the least of issue in CBI report with recommendation of only minor penalty through RDA seems to bear it all! The blog post (Link) tells what is considered as 'misrepresentation' in a letter dated 11-5-2004 by CBI for which minor penalty was suggested. And the penalty was suggested through a departmental enquiries where CBI document 'would not be cited to be relied upon documents'. Also such minor penalty cases are definitely not criminal offence as appears in CBI's own regulations (Link).

How much is the minor penalty through RDA? Press Trust of India (PTI) report published in Business India today (Link) says, "A delinquent government employee faces censure and withholding of increment among others in case of minor penalty. "  Note that the above mentioned letter in which fault was found, was written by the youngest of the Deans at IIT Kharagpur who was below 45 years of age. This was within about four and half months of assuming a big responsibility of Dean (SRIC). It was based on what he inherited and he wrote, what he wrote, in black and white. Why was he made Dean, Sponsored Research at such a young age? It was the track record and his inspirational role as a researcher. By that time he earned INSA Young Scientist Award, INAE Young Engineer Award, Swarnajayanti Fellowship, Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar Prize etc. to his credit and established AVLSI lab. which is a pride of not only IIT Kharagpur.

Even then, let us assume that there was an administrative lapse for the young incumbent. Let us further assume that the RDA gives him minor penalty which is hardly anything for a young Dean for any oversight of his predecessor's work in the beginning of his deanship. But let it be given and his name be cleared. Why IIT Kharagpur did not do that since 2007 can be best answered by the institute but it asked this person to live with, as if, there is a rope around his neck which can be pulled at any point of time.

While all major accused had their life in full, the only minor accused, the President Gold Medal (PGM) Winner, the topper in the batch, the role model before generations of IITians for his unblemished love for the country and the institute which made him reject many, many lucrative offers from India and abroad, and chose to do PhD in the country with a paltry stipend, is made an hounded soul. Even after being a Director-Elect for many, many months now the 'minor penalty' issue is raised again and again.

Why is he made a victim like this? Is there any clue anywhere? The posts of this blog (Link) leaves some hints and we may connect it with the report published by The Pioneer (Link). It says with emphasis "In a first of its kind, the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) has asked the HRD Ministry to dismiss three IIT professors — including IIT-Patna Director and the Dean of the prestigious IIT-Kharagpur — from service." The title of this report is "CVC asks HRD Ministry to fire 3 IIT Professors."

Dismiss from service for the Director-Elect., the Dean of IIT Kharagpur? The PTI report that is published in Business India (Link), Economic Times (Link), Zee News (Link) and the report from correspondent in Times of India (Link) talks about recommendation for only 'minor penalty' which has been there since 2007. Where from the 'dismiss from service' come for the 'Dean of the prestigious IIT-Khargpur'? Isn't it surprising? May not be so if one is a follower of this space. Please keep reading the Pioneer report till end and you will find this is the only report that brings the name of a so called  'whistle blower' who is an IIT Kharagpur professor, which no other newspaper bring in their report. The Pioneer says, "The institute is also likely to face the music for ignoring the HRD Ministry's repeated directions to revoke suspension of IIT-whistleblower Prof Rajeev Kumar of Computer Science and Engineering Department. While the CVC is seized with the matter, the complaint has also reached the Visitor (President of India)." Please find image of the Pioneer report and the editing done by the whistleblower in his website in his website. This is the only newspaper report where he does editing himself in the website. All lead newspapers clearly say that it is only minor issue for Director-Elect and minor penalty from Dept. through RDA. But this papers says 'dismissal', 'firing'. The causal relationship is too evident. It is visible which newspaper and which personalities are on the side of the truth and who is trying to victimize, harass, scuttle the appointment of Director-Elect by creating media pressure by spreading false information.

This is the land of Ramayana. Here, due to mistake of elders Lord Rama and his wife had to live in the forest, face mighty Ravana and many other difficulties. But even today Rama Rajya is what goes as the best of all. The Director-Elect too will get his opportunity when all these trials and tribulations are over and the nation will remember for ages how he administered his institution. The time will come. As a IIT Kharagpur lover, I would like that institution to be IIT Kharagpur only. The nation cannot be deprived of service of greats like him. Till then in prayer.

P.S.: I reserve my comment on other two Prof.s as there is not enough information in public domain to conduct an analysis.


My comment in comment section of Times of India report was as follows:

Purab (Kolkata)8 hrs ago

Interesting and intriguing! On one hand, we heard "In March this year (2012), Sibal’s ministry asked the institute to seek advice from the Central Vigilance Commission since it had rejected the CBI report. The institute has to explain to the CVC the reasons for rejecting the CBI recommendations, but have the liberty to accept or reject the vigilance commission’s advice." (The Telegraph, Thursday July 05, 2012) The Board rejects the same as CBI report themselves state that the report is ‘not to be relied upon’ (storiesandinsidestories [dot] blogspot [dot] in/2012/08/facts-behind-coal-net-allegations [dot] html ) and there may be other reason not available in public domain. Now the Director recruitment requires CVC clearance and they have one of this person (Prof. P. P. Chakraboti) in their own backyard even if goes against the letter and spirit of MHRD directive as per The Telegraph report and he has ‘minor’ issue. 
 
Is it a war of ego between CVC and Board which makes innocent getting victimized? Note the timeline. CBI's own 'not to be relied upon' report mentioned minor action against Prof. P. P. Chakraborti in 2007, and CVC is not giving clearance in 2013! Why did you not take minor action even if it is warranted before, which could have been mild rebuke or asking the young faculty who just assumed the heavy responsibility of Dean(SRIC) to be more careful. The second reference above shows that there was not any misrepresentation either as our understanding of English language goes. Therefore, going by the letter and spirit of MHRD directive stated in The Telegraph report, it is requested to MHRD to clear the name of Prof. P. P. Chakraborti by impressing upon CVC and not to delay the appointment of him as Director. The delay, the timing reminds the Aesop's Fable of the wolf and the lamb www [dot] taleswithmorals [dot] com/aesop-fable-the-wolf-and-the-lamb [dot] htm . Hope MHRD will do something so that next generation kids grow up not reading stories how a would be Director was eaten up of his portfolio, hounded of his soul - as a replacement of animated characters of fables. 

I have faith in India and its value system. This comment is not to hurt anyone. My apology if it sounds like that anywhere. It is just a reading of proceedings as available in public domain by a public who is keenly watching the development for long and sarcasm, if any, comes from that. Apology once again. I request all concerned - CVC, MHRD, IIT Board to sit together and resolve their differences if any and show the world that we fight but we can make up as the country and its prized institutions comes first to all of us. You are big people. We look up to you for guidance, fairness, strengthening faith in the system. Regarding other two professors there is not enough in public domain to conduct research and pass a comment. Shall comment as and when it is available. Thanks Purab Purabspeaks [dot] blogspot [dot] in

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rejoinder:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There was a follow up article in Times of India where apparently IIT Kharagpur Head said that they did not know what to do (Link).

The following was my comment to start with. 

Purab (Kolkata) 1 day ago

Please go through the latest post of purabspeaks [dot] blogspot [dot] in Even if minor fault is found then regular departmental enquiry suggested in 2007 could make "censure and withholding of increment among others in case of minor penalty." as per PTI and other reports. This was to be done by then Director and administration. The Board of Governor who is a superior body than departmental enquiry team, in fact the most superior at IIT Kharagpur, did not find anything wrong and did not recommend even that small penalty, quashed the allegation and communicated it to MHRD. Whether CBI's led down procedure was or was not followed or to be followed, where departmental enquiry recommendation is superior to BOG recommendation, were to be taken up by CBI, CVC, MHRD at that time. Anyways, it is clearly stated the minor penalty suggested is nothing (by BOG) or minimal (if departmental enquiry differed from BOG recommendation). Thus the talk of removal from Director-ship after Director selection which is a major penalty is against principle of natural justice and should not stand in court of law in any civilized world (I am not a law expert, talking from common sense). It clearly makes Director-Elect a victim and all concerned (that may include the organizations named before) a direct or indirect perpetrator in victimizing a person whose background and credential need no repetition. Summarizing, there was a BOG enquiry instead of departmental enquiry. BOG is considered most superior at IIT and institute may have thought that is better than regular departmental enquiry. BOG did not recommend even that minor penalty and quashed charges and one has to note that CBI itself said that there report "would not be cited to be relied upon documents. " Therefore, BOG's enquiry and recommendation are to be respected. The procedural lapse if any in enquiry does not attribute to Director-Elect. and he cannot be faulted for that but to BOG why they did what they were not supposed to do. Even if a lesser body (to BOG) like departmental enquiry suggested a minor action on minor lapse it would have been what PTI report says and nothing grave for new youngest of the Deans was new to his role at that time. And a minor penalty cannot be converted to a major penalty i.e. not giving the Director-ship for no fault of would-be Director where he could never be a part of the enquiry that took place not as per procedure as appears from report. Therefore, CVC, MHRD, BOG cannot link it to Director appointment after the selection is made by raking up an old minor issue and resolve the matter gracefully for the benefit of the institute and its national and international audience. Thanks - Purab  It was  great to see Prof. Gautam Barua, Director, IIT Guwahati joining the discussion later and clearing the air for all. To have an IIT Director coming forward and saying something where ordinary individuals like us are expressing opinion is path-breaking. Any reporter would perhaps have obliged him had he wanted to say anything. But he chose commoner's forum. The following is what he said. 

Gautam Barua (Guwahati) 1 day ago

The matter regarding PPC is minor and unfortunately it has got enmeshed in technicalities ( I cannot comment on the coalnet project itself as enough info is not available publicly). From what I have read, it seems that the Board of Governors of IIT KGP had taken cognizance of the CBI report and decided that no penalty was warranted against PPC after examining the matter. Now all that the Institute needs to do is to inform the CVC and MHRD that "proceedings" against PPC were taken in 2009 (or whenever the Board decided) and he was found not guilty of any wrong doing. As per the IITKGP Statutes, there is no need for "an enquiry" for minor penalties. If the Board examines the matter and takes the decision, it is as per the Act and Statutes of IIT Kgp. IIT KGP is not a Govt organisation, but an autonomous body created by an Act of Parliament. It is governed by the Act and its Statutes. Govt rules come into play only if the Act and Statutes do not provide rules for the issue at hand. This is not the case here. In fact, even as per Govt rules, an “ex parte examination” is the first step in “proceedings” and if this examination finds no case, then the matter is closed then and there. So, if the Board has examined the matter and dismissed it, this was an “ex parte examination”! Gautam Barua, Director, IIT Guwahati  The following was my 'Thank You' note to Prof. Barua in that forum. 

Purab (Kolkata) replies to Gautam Barua 1 day ago

Thank you Prof. Barua. Finally, it is the Director of IIT Guwahati who cleared the air. IITKGP, hope you are listening. Thank you Prof. Barua, thank you very much. I do not know the rules, acts or statutes. But from common sense, this is what I was thinking (the first comment of this thread). To get educated by an IIT Director like you is always a enriching experience. Hope things improve and sensibility prevails now on. Thank you once again and ou deepest respect. Purab  And this evening there was an official press release by IIT Kharagpur (Link) saying,"IIT Kharagpur remains committed to expeditiously resolving all issues with its stakeholders, regulatory bodies and the Government of India," and that the issue "require quick resolution while respecting all voices, regulatory bodies and keeping in mind the strategically important role that IIT Kharagpur has as the first and leading IIT".