Dimapur, Jan 8 (MExN): Nagaland University Vice Chancellor and Registrar are in for cannon fodder for NU teachers and students who are accusing the two over a substantial number of counts reflecting their “insensitivity” and “total lack of concern” in the wake of the deaths of three SASARD students in Goa January 1.
The NUTA and PGSU of Medziphema, Kohima and Lumami campuses of NU today issued a number of points questioning the two NU heads. The points include, the VC and Registar’s refusal to the Registrar to officially contact Resident Commissioner, Nagaland House, New Delhi to book train tickets for the students and teachers returning to Nagaland from Goa via Delhi after the tragedy; the VC “telephonically harassing” the Dean of SASARD even at Guwahati Airport and on the journey back, to release the body of Ajungla Longchar at Numaligarh to be taken to Mokokchung.
The release, signed by President of CEC (NUTA) Dr Nzambemo Lotha, PGSU Medziphema President Ruokuo, PGSU Lumami president Daniel Aier and PGSU Kohima President Solomon Ritse condemned their chiefs’ insensitivity and total lack of concern towards the tragedy over on the following: Refusal to the Registrar to officially contact Resident Commissioner, Nagaland House, New Delhi to book train tickets for the student and teachers returning to Nagaland from Goa via Delhi after the tragedy; refusal of the VC and the Registrar to make financial commitment to bear all expenses for the three bodies to be brought to their homes from Goa; instruction of the VC to the Dean SASARD not to allow any teachers and students to go to Guwahati to collect the bodies, “as some people were taking a political mileage” and that only family of the departed should collect them from Guwahati; refusal of the Vice Chancellor to hold the funeral service organized by the students and teachers at SASARD Campus; the VC not receiving the bodies at Guwahati Airport and returning to Kohima the previous evening prior to the arrival of the bodies; the Registrar’s absence at SASARD Campus to coordinate arrangements for the bodies with the teacher and students and instead harassing the Dean for not coming up to Kohima and meeting him.
“According to University protocol, the DEAN is above the Registrar and has the authority to take decisions in the absence of the VC” the release noted.
It also took cognizance the “total silence” of the Vice Chancellor in his condolence message on the gratitude of the University to the Governor of Goa and all authorities at Goa for helping retrieve the three bodies and reaching them safely till Guwahati Airport at the initiatives of His Excellency; “the insensitive attitude” of the VC and Registrar who drove off with the police escort to Kohima after the midnight funeral service, “overtaking the motorcade carrying our dead students towards Kohima on the 4th January night”; The Vice Chancellor’s insistence that all expenses for the three students from Guwahati to their villages be borne by the Dean and teachers of SASARD till the 6th January, 2006; The VC telephonically harassing the Dean SASARD even at Guwahati Airport and on the journey back, to release the body of Ajungla Longchar at Numaligarh to be taken to Mokokchung even though he was fully aware that the three bodies were in a single ambulance and parents had agreed to the funeral service at SASARD before proceeding to their villages.
“We question the Vice Chancellor on what grounds the teachers and students were trying to get “political mileage” on arrangements for our three students to be brought to their homes and families. We demand from the Vice Chancellor to come out publicly on how “political mileage” has been used in this tragic incident. We also question whether this is his vision for the Naga generation” the release stated.
Meanwhile, it appreciated that the smooth arrival of our three departed students to SASARD, the funeral service and the journey to their respective villages were made possible through the collective efforts of the teaches, students, well wishers and through the pressure mounted on the University authority by the aforesaid and “not from the Vice Chancellor’s and Registrar’s initiatives as they were totally reluctant to bear their responsibilities as explained in the above points”.
