Gay Prof damned by AMU based on enquiry based on hearsay!
RTI query reveals the proctor's office has no record of either the evidence or the proctorial board that led to the suspension of Prof Srinivas Ramchandra Siras
View Image
Author Profile
Just a few weeks after hounding a gay professor, Srinivas Ramchandra Siras, to what is being suspected as suicide, the Aligarh Muslim University has revealed that it has no record of either the proctorial board or the so-called evidence that led to such gross violation of law and liberty.
In response to a query filed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the university has said that it does not have any record of any of its officials having seen the video clip that allegedly showed the late professor indulging in homosexual activities.
The university has revealed that it suspended Prof Siras, reader and chairman of the department of modern Indian languages, on February 9 on the basis of just a report prepared by two of its officials.
The university revealed these details in response to a 16-point query filed by Delhi-based gay rights activist Anjali Gopalan.
Following his suspension, Prof Siras was ordered to vacate his campus accommodation, and he was found dead on April 6.
Significantly, the university's decision to suspend the professor came seven months after Delhi High Court legalised consensual gay sex, even as it “charged” Prof Siras of exercising this legal right within the privacy of his home on the campus.
Shouldn't the university have, instead, taken action against those who invaded the professor's privacy and filmed him without his knowledge?
Despite the clear legal sanction for consensual gay sex, the university actually served the professor a “chargesheet” for having exercised his legal right.
And now, the university has admitted it does not even have any record of just who confirmed the so-called evidence against the deceased professor.
It acted on the basis of a single-page report prepared by the proctor and the public relations officer.
“How can they take a report as evidence?” said Tariq Islam, reader, department of philosophy.
According to this report, the two reached Prof Siras’ house in the university on the night of February 8, 2010 when they found media persons talking to the professor. “Since we were not aware of any incident/happening, we took the media persons in another room and were informed by them of the business going on in the house,” says the report on the basis of which the professor was suspended.
The report further says the university officials saw the video clippings of Prof Siras involved in homosexual activity with a rickshaw puller.
“I have seen the clip and I believe it is enough to suspend him under rules 403-C of the AMU statute on the grounds of misconduct,” Rahat Abrar, AMU spokesperson, had told India Today magazine.
Yet, the university has said in its response to the RTI query, “No record is available in the proctor office that who viewed the indecent video clip featuring Dr Siras.”
Related stories
More stories in this section
In This Section
Editor's View
It was despicable that Prof Siras should have been suspended by an educational institute for his sexual preferences that too just months after the landmark Delhi High Court judgement decriminalising consensual gay sex. But it now turns out that the university was so eager to take action that it did not follow the basic norms of an enquiry, right to reply etc. Shame on you AMU!
Andhra Pradesh
Bihar
BJP
budget
CBI
china
Commonwealth Games
congress
Delhi
e-governance
facebook
Gujarat
High Court
India
jairam ramesh
jammu and kashmir
Kerala
Lok Sabha
Maharashtra
Manmohan Singh
maoists
Mumbai
orissa
parliament
P Chidambaram
Pranab Mukherjee
prime minister
rajya sabha
RTI
supreme court




what difference does it make whether or not there was a video and who saw it? The professor had a right to have consensual sex with anyone. The university had no authority to conduct an inquiry into the sexual lives of the professors in the first place.
Post new comment