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:
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."
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.
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". 