The Nalanda University Bill,2010

THE NALANDA UNIVERSITY BILL, 2010

(Shri Bal Apte ji Speech on 21.08.2010)

SHRI BALAVANT alias BAL APTE (MAHARASHTRA): Sir, while participating in the discussion on this Bill for establishment of the Nalanda University, initially I would like to make two general observations. One is about our approach to education and the establishment of universities.

Sir, education is one and it encompasses all possible disciplines. But, unfortunately, our administrative structure is such that if a university is established for a particular purpose, then it doesn't come from the Education Ministry but it is established by some other Ministry which has nothing to do with education. Here this University is being initiated by the External Affairs Ministry. If some university is to be established in a tribal area, then again it is not through the Education Ministry but it is the Tribal Ministry which introduces it. If it is a college or university for social work, then sanction does not come from the Education Department but it comes from the Social Services Department. If a college or an institution is to be established in a rural area, it comes from the Rural Development. All these Departments have nothing to do with education and yet they establish universities. In such a situation, it is necessary that for the purposes of development of education in this country and when they are talking about that knowledge society, then education has to be under one command with the entire structure being seen as a part of the whole. That is missing. This is my first observation.

Secondly, all these years, after Independence our perspective has always been Euro-centric. Our history is looked at from a Euro-centric point of view; our geography and economy are looked at from Euro-central point of view and even our map is drawn from a Euro-centric point of view. Now, the United Nations has corrected that map and the correct size has come. Otherwise, everything is Euro-centric.

Fortunately, all this pattern is, in a way, evolving into something better and that is the aspect which is at the basis of the establishment of this University, and now we are looking eastward. Initially, it was South-Asia, then South-East Asia and now East Asia. This change of attitude is very relevant and, I would say, very welcome. Sir, from the economic point of view this is better. The other day I had asked a question about our Free Trade Agreements, particularly to know whether we are concentrating on this area or not. Fortunately, we are having Free Trade Agreements -- AFTA, SAFTA, ASEAN -- and, therefore, our attitude is changing economically.

So far as other aspects of international life are concerned, this entire area has a deep civilizational underpinning which naturally brings us together and our coming together may be able to shape the destiny of the world tomorrow. This area which is coming together economically, culturally and politically is very very relevant because this solid combination will shape the destiny of the world. Sir, before the establishment of this University and the establishment of South Asia University, these civilisational underpinnings were noted not only by us but by this entire region and this is reflected in three statements of this region which are the foundation of this legislation. I would like to refer to these three statements.

One is given in the SAARC meeting held in Dhaka. The Dhaka Declaration of 13th November, 2005, expressly mentions, in so far as this region is concerned, our shared values, beliefs, aspirations and shared cultural heritage. This entire region has shared values and shared cultural heritage. Therefore, it becomes very relevant. In that circumstances, in 2005, we offered for South Asia that yes, we would establish a university here for this entire region. That offer was reiterated by our Prime Minister in 2008 in Sri Lanka that said that we would do it in Delhi. Consequently, the South Asia University Act was passed by this Legislature last year. Unfortunately, it was passed without discussion, and, therefore, we did not have the opportunity to share our views here. But, the legislation is passed and a University for South Asia is established in Delhi. I don't know about its progress, and in so far as established universities and their progress is concerned, I have always been pessimistic. But, I hope that something might have been done.

Sir, the second relevant international statement was made in the Second Summit of East Asia. That was in 2007. There, the Chairman’s Statement, that is, the Statement of that Summit mentions renewal of our historical ties, and as a part of that renewal of historical ties, it is mentioned that let us revive the Nalanda University. The reason that was given then was "for improving regional understanding, appreciation of one another's heritage and history." This is the commitment which we made and the Bill has now come.

Sir, the third document, which really throws much light on what this country can do for this entire region, is the ASEAN-India Summit. These summits are going on for quite some time now. This Fifth ASEAN-India Summit was held in January, 2007, and I do not know the coincidence, but it was 14th January, that is the day of Makar Sankranti, the day of change - change towards brightness. On that day, the Chairman’s Statement, that is, the Statement of that ASEAN-India Summit mentions three things. One, they say and they are addressing India, that your 'Look East' Policy is welcome.

Secondly, they say, "We acknowledge India's cultural and religious influence in Asia and other parts of the world." They have referred to this cultural and religious influence along with the influence of Bollywood, our weightless goods.

Then, thirdly, they say, "We welcome India's offer to institutionalise the training course for diplomats from ASEAN countries." We have initiated that and we have said that we will establish a permanent institution here for training diplomats for the entire region. So, India, a natural, historical hub of knowledge and training, is again seeking to assume that role. Thereafter, the Fourth East Asia Summit was held in Thailand and we again offered that this University shall be an international university and it was decided there that Nalanda University will be established in this country. In this background, the present Bill is introduced and naturally, what the preamble says is from these Summits' statements. The preamble says that we are establishing an international institute for pursuit of intellectual, philosophical, historical and spiritual studies and for matters connected therewith.

Secondly, it mentions that we are doing this to improve regional understanding and appreciation of one another's heritage and history -- the second East Asia Summit -- and, thirdly, networking and collaboration between the proposed Nalanda University and existing Centers of Excellence -- the fourth East Asia Summit -- so that the participating countries can work together symbolizing the spirituality that unites all mankind. This is what the Summits said, and, this is what we have adopted as the Preamble, naturally, and, now, this Bill has been introduced.

Sir, earlier, the Bihar Government had taken a welcome initiative and had already established the University of Nalanda in 2007. As several other good initiatives by the Bihar Government for development, this initiative was naturally very good, and, now, that University under this Bill is being incorporated under an Act of Parliament. Sir, at this stage, I will not go into the sections of the Bill. The objectives are those which have been mentioned earlier.

As I said, this shows that we are, again, going towards the idea of this country being the hub of knowledge and learning, and, it is very relevant in this 21st century where we are talking about the establishment and existence of knowledge societies in which India has a primacy in terms of its youth, its talent, its knowledge and in terms of information, knowledge and wisdom. Information is relevant if it is knowledge, and, knowledge is relevant if it is blessed with wisdom, and, all these put together is one word in this country, which is called, 'Vidya'. Vidya is knowledge with wisdom, and, we say,  Earlier, it was wealth; yes, people came here mainly for wealth; but people came here for knowledge. So, we have that rare combination of wealth and wisdom, and, therefore, the Universities in this country were sought after by the entire world. The history goes back to 3000 years. 800 years B.C., Takshila University flourished. This university had 18 disciplines, from Combat to Construction, from Ved to Vadan and, students from as far as Mesopotamia, Parthia, Media came to this university to study.

Sir, we had university at Gunashila. Sir, Bihar had been the cradle of the Indian civilization, of the Hindu civilization. All this is in Bihar. Gunashila, a Jain university in Bihar, was established 500 years B.C. It was a Jain university promoting mainly women's education, and, then, there was Kundinpur, again, of 500 B.C., and, it was mainly for physical training. Then, Kanchi was there from 100 B.C. to 1200 A.D., and, then, of course, Nalanda. Nalanda flourished between 400 A.D. to 1200 A.D. This university had students and teachers from all over the world. Hiuen Tsang was a student here who toured the entire world. Several other Chinese were students here. There were 78 disciplines, as they say, 14 fo

k, 64 कला, from Ayurveda to Dhanurveda, and, from Ved to Viman. Unfortunately, anti-civilisation invaders came and all this was destroyed. Now, we have this University.

Sir, I have two-three specific suggestions in so far as this University is concerned. One is, the motto of this University should be शील वृRk फला fo

k। शील is character and वृRk is conduct. So, the knowledge should be such which will guide both character and conduct, and that should be the motto of this University which is going to be an international University. Sir, an amendment is coming from one of the respected Members of this House who says that this concept of University should be abandoned. If it is to be really an international University, it should be a University of learning. So, it should be Vidyapeeth. He says adopt that word, bring it into English and enrich that language. Secondly, Sir, what this University should do -- in fact, every educational institution should do -- is this. Why are we here? Why are we learning? The example of the Yale University is, I think, worthy to be emulated. Sir, the Yale University established a course. They call it direct studies. This course was established after the Second World War and the reason was to tell the present students the ingredients of the civilisation for whose sake the War was fought. Why was the War fought? Not merely to defeat Hitler, but to save a civilisation and the ingredients of that civilization should be known. That is why the War was fought. That is why we are here. Therefore, that course of direct studies was established in the Yale University. I believe, this University should also establish a course as to why should we read. To protect the ingredients of a rich civilization which this entire region inherits and which this entire region has a responsibility to transmit to the rest of the world. Sir, if we do this and if we retain the high standards of education in this University, maybe this can be a hub like the South Asia University. Students not only from the Asian region but from the entire world will come for knowledge and wisdom which this country is destined to give to the world.
Thank you, Sir.

************

National Rural Employment Guarantee Bill, 2005.

Speech delivered by

Shri Bal Apteji, BJP National

Vice-President and Member of Parliament (Rajya Sabha)

National Rural Employment Guarantee Bill, 2005

SHRI BALAVANT ALIAS BAL APTE (MAHARASHTRA):  Sir, I am grateful to you for this opportunity. Sir, I have the onerous task of responding to this flamboyantly eloquent assault, which was really a relentless assault, almost like a pre-emptive strike, with some rational approach.  Sir, we are here to discuss the National Rural Employment Guarantee Bill, 2005 as passed by the Lok Sabha.  Sir, probably, with his speech, the hon. Minister wanted this House to pass the Bill without discussion.  But it is not going to be so.  This House is going to discuss the Bill.

       Sir, we are going through this legislation and we are in the process of passing it in a kind of tearing haste, and, almost by habit, I find that when you talk about haste, acting in haste, you always are apprehensive of repenting in leisure.                      

  So, this tearing haste should not, I hope, lead us to repentance because this haste is reflected in the formulation and the passage of this Bill.  "Æü¸ü ÆüÖ£Ö ÛúÖê ÛúÖ´Ö †Öî¸ü Æü¸ü ÜÖêŸÖ ÛúÖê ¯ÖÖ®Öß" was the dream put forward by Shri Deen Dayal Upadhyaya 40 years ago, and that has been the cherished dream of this country.  But, Sir, today we are not discussing dreams only, but we are also passing a law which will create certain enforceable rights and certain obligatory liabilities.  Sir, any Government functions through certain policies and through its law-making.  Both are the functions of the Government.  But, there is a qualitative difference between the two.  In so far as the Government's policy is concerned, it is a matter of expression of intent.  And, if it is exposed, you  find that expression of intent was hollow.  I have the example of the National Education Policy of 1986 which formulated the universalisation of education, and, I believe, in the Planning Commission, at that moment, the relevant Member (Education) was Prof. M.G.K. Menon, who said, "We don't have  even a pie for this project".  So, a policy formulation was there and there was a failure.  But, Sir, when you enact a statute, it is a commitment of Parliament to the people.  A statute is not merely a commitment, but it creates enforceable rights for the people.  Therefore, everybody has to think more while passing a law, because it is supposed to be implemented.  When I was referring to the National Education Policy, I was reminded of an axiomatic saying by Prof. D.S. Kothari, who produced the earlier Education Commission Report. He said that a Report is no substitute for an action.  Therefore, a dream brought on paper is no substitute to an action.  And, I believe that the present legislation is fated to be disillusionment because there was  (i) no homework, (ii) there was no ground assessment and there was (iii) no understanding of a future prospective.  Therefore, I am afraid, at the implementation level, this legislation is facing a darker future. 

 Sir, in so far as the homework is concerned, I find that the bulk of the legislation is on the basis of implementation by the States, and States are, at no stage, involved in the making of this law.  They are not involved; they are not consulted.  It was clear when the Secretaries of the States gave evidence before the Standing Committee.  Without their involvement, this legislation can't be successful and they are not involved at any stage so far.

 (ii) Secondly, Sir, the financial implications ought to have been studied beforehand.  But that has not been done. Wherefrom the money will come?  Nobody knows it.  Even the Finance Minister does not know.  He says, "We will find money somewhere".  In such circumstances, Sir, it is always said if your conclusions are wrong, check your premises.                                          

  In the present scheme of things, the premises are that there is unemployment, there are finances, and, therefore, employment is guaranteed.  But here it is the other way round.  What kind of unemployment is there is not assessed.  From where will the finances come?  Nobody knows.  And, therefore, I believe, the conclusion is that there is no guarantee of getting employment.

       (!!) Secondly, Sir, there is no ground assessment before passing this legislation.  Today, there are several schemes working.  In fact, there is a long list.  And the physical performance -- of these schemes -- is noted by the Economic Survey of 2004-05.  The National Food-for-Work Programme was started in November, 2004, in which Rs.2,020 crores were invested and twenty lakh tonnes of foodgrains were made available.  The Swarnajayanti Gram Swarajya Yojana (SGSY) -- the bureaucrats talk in these terminologies, SGSY or SGRY, which I do not understand immediately -- was initiated in April, 1999. The Sampoorna Grameen Rojgar Yojana (SGRY) was initiated in 2001; it was to be implemented through Panchayati Raj institutions.  Then the Rural Employment Generation Programme (REGP) was initiated in 1995, and the Report says that 8.32 lakh jobs were created up to 2003-04, and 5.25 lakh jobs were to be created during 2004-05.  Then there is the Prime Minister's Rojgar Yojana (PMRY), which was initiated in 1993.  Under it, self-employment units so far, are 20 lakhs, and the target for 2004-05 was 16.50 lakh employment opportunities.  The Swarnajayanti Shahri Rojgar Yojana (SJSRY) was initiated in 1997, and the Employment Assurance Scheme (EAS) was initiated in 1993. 

Sir, apart from these, there are several other schemes for rural development which essentially are the schemes for rural employment.  What is the yield of all these schemes? What is the correlation between the money spent and the employment generated?  And then, what remains to be done?  Nobody has studied it.  And, Sir, if these or any of these schemes have failed, an inquiry is necessary as to why it has failed.  If the earlier scheme has failed due to certain reasons, without eradicating those reasons, any scheme for rural employment is bound to fail.  Therefore, I am saying that no ground assessment is made before going into this legislation. 

Sir, I remember, every year when a Railway Minister presents his Budget, he sanctions several schemes, and then certain allocation is made for each of those schemes.  If there are several Ministers within a period of 5-6 years, then so many schemes are sanctioned.  Each scheme is given certain amount of money.  Therefore, there are 100 projects pending -- 100 projects at a stage where some money is spent, much more is to be spent, and they continue to be pending.  We have scores of such examples in any report of the Railway Convention Committee.  Sir, if there are already 10-20 schemes, and one more scheme is going to be added to these; some money is spent on the earlier schemes without results, some more money will be spent on this scheme without results; and, therefore, we will be having schemes but no results. 

(iii) The third congenital defect in this legislation is that there is no understanding, no assessment of a future perspective.  What projects are we going to undertake?  How much money is going to be spent on each of them?                              

 In these projects, how many people will be employed?  When the Ministry was asked, the Ministry said that the data in so far as people above the poverty line are concerned, is not maintained.  So, there is no data.  This makes everything vague, everything doubtful and doesn't generate confidence; there is no question of guarantee.  And, Sir, I would like to mention here that apart from those who are unemployed, there are ten crore agricultural labourers who must be treated almost as unemployed because they are never employed throughout the year. 

       Sir, now, I seek to come to the Bill itself and it abounds, again, in defects.  Sir, only one substantial amendment on the basis of the Standing Committee's Report was accepted.  If the other amendments proposed were accepted, the Bill would have taken a different shape.  And that one amendment is from 'poor' household to 'every' household.  The word 'poor' is omitted and, therefore, all calculations have gone haywire.  The Financial Memorandum is based on the concept of every poor household, where they have calculated such able-bodied persons to be about ten crore, accumulated in 3.86 families.  I don't find any other word for accumulated, but people belonging to 3.86 families.  For them, for 100 days, you will require 1,00,464 crores.  All these calculations are on this and there also, they say we may not be required to spend this much because every person doesn't ask for a job.  Those who demand job may be only fifty per cent.  Therefore, we may be required to spend only fifty thousand crore.  But that calculation is on the basis that you have to cater to ten crore. The moment, you talk of removing ‘poor’ in every household, then you refer to 38.91 crore of able-bodied persons, not only men, between 18 and 64 age group.  Where are the calculations for this, even the rudimentary calculations?  And if 100,464 crore is a tall order, four-folds of this will be an order of such a nature that you will lose your cap when looking up.  Therefore, one amendment has put the legislation in a state of being haywire. 

       Sir, the Finance Minister said that we will find money somewhere.  I tried to find that 'somewhere' and I found that 26,500 crore is allocated to the social sector; out of which, eight thousand crore is for rural structure and development, part of it can be for rural employment.  Even if you consider those eight thousand crore and compare it with 40,000 crore, then, where would you find that money, is a question which is not answered.  So, we have only a fraction of the requirement on paper.  Otherwise, we don't know where the money will come from? 

Now, the second aspect is that the States are the implementing agencies.  As I mentioned earlier, the States are not involved and they are not going to spend anything. We find that here, in the Question Hour, whenever a question is asked about the money being sent to a particular State, we find that the contribution by the State is not forthcoming.  Therefore, further instalment is not sent.

The Centre does not send money because the State does not want to spend, and therefore, does not want to spend the Centre's money also. The Secretaries, as I have mentioned earlier, have made it clear to the Standing Committee that the States will not be able to spend anything on this.

Thirdly, Now, Sir, I come to the projects. Yes, the Schedule mentions the category of projects to be undertaken, and both things are considered there. But as I have said earlier, Æü¸ü ÆüÖ£Ö ÛúÖê ÛúÖ´Ö, Æü¸ü ÜÖêŸÖ ÛúÖê ¯ÖÖ®Öß.  So, irrigation facilities are given the priority. All kinds of water harvesting, and then, rural connectivity is also there. But it is only a categorization. When you go to the implementation level, there should, at least, be a study. Everything may not be done in the legislation, and in this House. I appreciate that. What will be the locations, what will be the cost, what will be the cost of other infrastructure?, there is a rough and ready estimate of 60:40. But we know that we need the skilled personnel and other infrastructure. The Kerala Government has said that 6 per cent of any project is spent on this. Otherwise, Sir, without this home work, there will be money spent, project named, the employed will be †¯Ö®Öê ‘Ö¸ü ´Öë, no payment to him, as is happening in many cases in Maharashtra. The lessons of Maharashtra have to be learnt. The scheme is working there for the last 31 years. Only the other day, it came in the newspapers that there was a scan of about Rs. 9 crores in one small village. No project, no money spent, the people are on the muster roll who are dead, and ‘only’ Rs. 9 crores in one small project, and we are covering the entire country.  So, these lessons have to be learnt, which I believe, have not been considered.

       Fourthly, Sir, we are talking about the minimum wage of Rs. 60/- or Rs. 66/-. Section 8 of the Minimum Wages Act contemplates the establishment of an Advisory Board which is there, and I know that the Advisory Board is seized of a national wage, of a national floor level minimum wage. Let that Advisory Board go into it. It has representatives of the workers, it has representatives of the employers. That Board will come to a very reasonable figure. This Rs. 60/- or Rs. 66/- is not a reasonable figure, and you can request the Advisory Board. The Advisory Board probably meets casually once a year because, it is obligatory to call the meeting. Activate it and you will get the results. It has to be a national floor level minimum wage which can be variable on the higher side, according to the circumstances, in a particular State.

       Fifthly, the machinery contemplated in this is again under a programme officer. We talked about the panchayat raj institutions. But that talk is meaningless because the programme officer is above them. He is going to be the sole decision-maker; he is going to be the sole person who will decide complaints, decide appeals and has the final authority. Sir, in this respect, we are still in that colonial mode where, for the British, Collector was their ultimate authority. We are following the same system, disrespecting the elected representatives of the people. Yes, politicians are corrupt. But, therefore, putting everything in the hands of bureaucracy, is more disastrous. Politicians are, at least, responsible to the people, and if the politician is at a lower level, he is more responsible. He has to face his town every day, he has to face his village every day.                                           

  And, therefore, Panchayati Raj institutions will remain only on paper.  This Programme Officer will control everything.  And this has been done during the entire colonial rule.  Therefore, Sir, during the freedom struggle, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru said, "No new order can be built in India as long as the spirit of ICS pervades Administration."  But, Sir, unfortunately, Pandit Nehru who had said earlier "The Civil Services were fossilised to bygone and obsolete methods", did say in 1948, after partition, because of uncertainties, and there are several other factors also, but I will not go into them- "One has to be careful of the steps one takes so as not to injure the existing structure too much."  So, he avoided injuring the existing structure.  Even today, like the colonial rulers, we believe more in that existing structure of bureaucrats than our own people!  And there lies the tragedy of this Scheme if it is to be handed over to a bureaucrat above the Panchayati Raj institutions.

       Sixthly, Sir, we are concerned here with the citizen's statutory rights. Right to work ought to be a fundamental right, but we always say that we don't want the Government to employ everybody, we don't want the governmentalisation of the economy!  When you create a right for the citizen by a statute, even if it is not fundamental, it is a statutory right, enforceable at law.  The enforcement and redressal machinery is conspicuous by its absence in this statute.  Clause 19 talks of the States creating a machinery under the rules.  A statutory right cannot be dealt with by a machinery under the rules.  It has to be a statutory machinery, with an appellate authority also, and, naturally, with natural justice as well as a time frame provided for redressal of grievances.  That is absent.  So, you are creating a right without its enforceability, which makes it useless. 

 Therefore, Sir, lastly, it is necessary for the implementation of this Scheme that the Centre assumes full responsibility; it does not leave any part of the financial burden on the States, and, as has been suggested by the Parliamentary Standing Committee, and as was suggested in the other House, implementation has to be done by the States, with full financial assistance from the Centre, and if it is not implemented, and, therefore, if a person is unemployed, then the unemployment allowance which is guaranteed under this should be paid by the States.  So, it will be a kind of coercion on the States that if they do not implement, they will have to pay.  The roles in the statute are to be reversed.  First, the Centre pays, and if that payment is not utilised, then the State should pay. This is one way of ensuring success through the States.  And, secondly, Sir, you have to empower the Panchayati Raj institutions for this.  The Seventy-third Amendment did this.  But there is a great lacuna that ultimately, it is the State which is controlling the finances.  If the money flows directly to the Gram Panchayats, through a proper Finance Commission, if necessary, by a Constitutional amendment, and, then, if money in this also goes directly to the Panchayats for implementation of the Scheme, the Scheme will be implemented, the Panchayats will perform, the people will participate.  We are talking about participatory democracy, we are talking about transparency and we are talking about social audit.  All that will be possible; plus the villages will have the projects of their choice, not those determined by some bureaucrats sitting in a chamber in the Mantralaya without knowing the ground realities.    

                                 

  Therefore, we hope, and hope is what sustains us....

†Ö¿ÖÖ ®ÖÖ´Ö ´Ö®ÖãµÖÖÞÖÖÓ ÁÖéÓÜÖ»ÖÖ ÛúÖדÖrË †¤Ëü³ÖãrÖ …

µÖµÖÖ ²Ö¨üÖ: ¯ÖÏ¿/kk¾Ö×®ŸÖ ´ÖãDrk% ×ršÓü×r ¯ÖÓÝÖã¾ÖrË ……

                           

Therefore, we run because we hope and I hope that the Government would take necessary steps to cure this and implement the scheme with all the vigour, finding all the money.  Otherwise, it will be another scheme on paper.  It will again remind us--he mentioned about Shri Rajiv Gandhi--what he said 20 years ago that one rupee, when it reaches to the last man, becomes 15 paise.  So, let us save the 85 paise.  Maybe, in cases like the one where I have said that the person whose name is on the muster roll was already dead, not even the 15 paise reach him.  So, let us save that by doing something on that.  With this caution, I wish this Government success in the implementation of this measure. 

 Thank you.            

                     

Minority Institution Bill Debate in Rajya Sabha

Minority Institution Bill Debate in Rajya Sabha 

 Date-21.12.2004

SHRI BALAVANT alias BAL APTE: Sir, I seek to oppose this Bill because I find that it is cosmetic and hypocritic.  Sir, I remember an old  adage,

"¿Ö¸Ë×ü¤ü ®Ö ¾ÖÂÖÔןÖ,ÝÖ•ÖÔןÖ, ¾ÖÂÖÔ×ŸÖ ¾ÖÂÖÖÔÃÖã, ׮քþ֮ÖÖê ´Öê‘Ö„…

       ®Öß“ÖÖê ¾Ö¤ü×ŸÖ ®Ö Ûãú¹ýŸÖê, ¾Ö¤ü×ŸÖ ®Ö ÃÖÖ¬Öã: Ûú¸üÖꟵÖê®Ö…"        

              ´ÖÆüÖê¤üµÖ, ×•Ö®Ö ÛúÖê Ûãú”û ®ÖÆüà Ûú¸ü®ÖÖ Æîü, ¾Öê ²ÖÖŸÖë •µÖÖ¤üÖ Ûú¸üŸÖê Æïü †Öî¸ü ×•Ö®Ö ÛúÖê Ûãú”û Ûú¸ü®ÖÖ Æîü, ¾Öê ²ÖÖŸÖë Ûú´Ö Ûú¸üŸÖê Æïü… ‡ÃÖ ²ÖÖ¸êü ´Öë ¤üÖê ˆ¤üÖÆü¸üÞÖ †Ö¯Ö Ûêú ÃÖÖ´Ö®Öê ¸üÜÖ®ÖÖ “ÖÖÆüŸÖÖ ÆæÓü…                                                         

ÁÖß ²Ö»Ö¾ÖÓŸÖ ˆ±Ôú ²ÖÖ»Ö †Ö¯Ö™êü (ÛÎú´ÖÖÝÖŸÖü) : ÃÖ¸ü, ‹®Ö.›üß.‹. ÃÖ¸üÛúÖ¸ü ®Öê †¯Ö®Öê ÛúÖµÖÔÛúÖ»Ö ´Öë ´ÖÖî»ÖÖ®ÖÖ †Ö•ÖÖ¤ü ‹•ÖãÛêú¿Ö®Ö ±úÖˆÞ›êü¿Ö®Ö ÛúÖê ו֮¤üÖ Ûú¸üŸÖê Æãü‹, 352 ´ÖÖ‡®ÖÖò׸ü™üß ‡ÓÙüß™ü¶æ¿Ö®ÃÖ ÛúÖê 69 Ûú¸üÖê›Íü, 65 »ÖÖÜÖ 39 Æü•ÖÖ¸ü Ûúß ´Ö¤ü¤ü ¤üß…  ŸÖß®Ö Æü•ÖÖ¸ü ´Ö¤ü¸üÃÖÖë ÛúÖê ´ÖÖò›ü®ÖÖÔ‡•Öê¿Ö®Ö Ûêú ×»Ö‹ ´Ö¤ü¤ü ¤üß…  ÃÖïÛú›ÍüÖë ”ûÖ¡ÖÖ†Öë †Öî¸ü Æü•ÖÖ¸üÖë ”ûÖ¡ÖÖë ÛúÖê ÃÛúÖò»Ö¸ü׿֯ÃÖ ¤üß…  ˆ¤æÔü ‹Ûêú›ü´Öß ÛúÖ ²Ö•Ö™ü, •ÖÖê ‡®ÖÛêú ÛúÖµÖÔÛúÖ»Ö ´Öë 84 »ÖÖÜÖ £ÖÖ, ˆÃÖêü 11 Ûú¸üÖê›Íü ×ÛúµÖÖ, וÖÃÖ ¯Ö¸ü ›üÖ. ¸ü±úßÛú •ÖÛúÖ׸üµÖÖ ®Öê       ›üÖ. ´Öã¸ü»Öß ´Ö®ÖÖêÆü¸ü •ÖÖê¿Öß ÛúÖê †Öê¯Öê®Ö»Öß Ûú´¯»Öß´Öë™ü ×ÛúµÖÖ…  ‡ÃÖÛúê ²ÖÖ¤ü •ÖÖ×Æü¸üÖŸÖ ‹®Ö.›üß.‹. ®Öê ®ÖÆüà Ûúß, ŒµÖÖë×Ûú "¾Ö¤ü×ŸÖ ®Ö ÃÖÖ¬Öã: Ûú¸üÖꟵÖê"… (Ûéú¯ÖµÖÖ ÃÖã¬ÖÖ¸ü ¤ëü) ...(¾µÖ¾Ö¬ÖÖ®Ö)...

ÁÖß ˆ¯ÖÃÖ³ÖÖ¯Ö×ŸÖ : ¿ÖÖ×Æü¤ü ×ÃÖקüÛúß ÃÖÖÆü²Ö, ¯»Öß•Ö…  †Ö¯Ö ÛúÖ ®ÖÖ´Ö Æîü…  •Ö²Ö †Ö¯ÖÛúÖ ®ÖÖ´Ö †Ö‹ÝÖÖ ŸÖ²Ö ²ÖÖê×»Ö‹ÝÖÖ…

ÁÖß ²Ö»Ö¾ÖÓŸÖ ˆ±Ôú ²ÖÖ»Ö †Ö¯Ö™êü : ÃÖ¸ü, ‡®ÖÛúß ×Æü¯¯ÖÖÖêÛÎêúÃÖß ÛúÖ ¤æüÃÖ¸üÖ †×³Ö»ÖêÜÖ, ‡ÃÖ ¯ÖÖÙ»ÖµÖÖ´Öë™ü Ûêú ׸üÛúÖò›ËüÃÖÔ ´Öë Æîü…  1977 ´Öë •Ö²Ö •Ö®ÖŸÖÖ ¯ÖÖ™üßÔ ÛúÖ ¿ÖÖÃÖ®Ö †ÖµÖÖ, ŸÖ²Ö ÛÓúÙüß™ü¶æ¿Ö®Ö          46^th ‹´Öë›ü´Öë™ü ×²Ö»Ö 1978 ´Öæ¾Ö ×ÛúµÖÖ ÝÖµÖÖ, וÖÃÖ´Öë †ÖÙ™üÛú»Ö 338 ÃÖ²ÃÖß™ü¶æ›ü Ûú¸ü®Öê Ûúß ²ÖÖŸÖ Æãü‡Ô…   Article 338 provides for a Commissioner for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. By that amendment, it was proposed that there shall be a Commission for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, and it was also proposed that there shall be a Commission for the Minorities, to be known as the Minorities Commission.

       Sir, it is a matter of record that the Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes Commission amendment was passed, but the Minorities Commission amendment was not passed because of the Members of the other side. Therefore, this, that they opposed a Minorities Commission getting a constitutional status, and now they are bringing forward this Bill,  exposes their hypocrisy. ŒµÖÖë×Ûú ˆ®ÖÛúÖê Ûãú”û Ûú¸ü®ÖÖ ®ÖÆüà Æîü…  ³ÖÖÂÖÞÖ Ûú¸ü®ÖÖ Æîü… Ûãú»Ö ×´Ö»ÖÖÛú¸ü ‡®ÖÛúÖ ¾µÖ¾ÖÆüÖ¸ü ‹êÃÖÖ Æîü ×Ûú "¿Ö¸üפü ®Ö ¾ÖÂÖÔ×ŸÖ ÝÖ•ÖÔןÖ"…  Sir, this Bill actually is not for minorities. It is for minority institutions, which, in the present circumstances of dearth of professional colleges and demand for seats, want to make money. Therefore, this Bill is to favour these institutions, which want to make money.

 If I come to the legislation per se, I find firstly, it is unnecessary. We already have the National Commission for Minorities Act.1992 This Act makes provisions for the protection of the interest of minorities, minorities education, minorities welfare, and if at all, they wanted an authority to deal with even the affiliation of minority institutions, one simple amendment in that Act might have been necessary, might not have been necessary. But if you want to make a show that you are doing it for the minorities, you must bring a Bill with fanfare. That is what is required. Therefore, my first objection is that this is an unnecessary Bill. My second objection to this Bill is, it is patently mala fide, and the mala fides are writ large on the statement as to why an Ordinance was issued. The statement makes a mockery of the concept of Ordinance-making power under article 123 of the Constitution.

                          

SHRI BALAWANT alias BAL APTE (CONTD.):  It is a power which is termed as an emergency power, which is termed as a power to be  exercised when the Parliament is not in Session, and there are circumstances, compelling reasons, which require to resort to this power.  Now what is the urgency which is spelt out in the proclamation?

"In view of the commitment of the Government in the National Common Minimum Programme, ..."

--on the basis of which they came to power six months ago--

       "...the issue of setting up a National Commission for the minority

       educational institutions was a matter of utmost urgency."

No circumstances are referred to, not even mentioned!  And this is done on 11^th November, 2004.  Normally, the Parliament sits from the week commencing from 17^th November or so.  They did not have any Legislative Business; therefore, the Session was cut short to three weeks.  If the Parliament were to sit on 17^th November, what was the urgency to issue an Ordinance on 11^th November?  Therefore, my attack on this Bill is on the basis that it is a Bill mala fide not for the purposes for which it is sought to be enacted. 

       My more serious objection to this Bill is with reference to Article 30.  The source of Minority Institutions' rights is Article 30. The way that

Article has been used and interpreted by the courts, it has become a privilege to be a minority in this country because you are above law, because you are above regulation, and, therefore, if you are an institution, with the label 'minority' on it, you can do whatever you like. ...(Interruptions)...

¯ÖÏÖêü0 ÃÖî±ãú§üß®Ö ÃÖÖê•Ö :  ÛúÖê‡Ô ³Öß ‹Ý•ÖÖ´¯Ö»Ö ¤êü ¤üßו֋…

ÁÖß ˆ¯ÖÃÖ³ÖÖ¯Ö×ŸÖ : ÃÖÖê•Ö ÃÖÖÆü²Ö, †Ö¯Ö ‡ÃÖ ¯Ö¸ü ²ÖÖê»Ö®Öê ¾ÖÖ»Öê Æïü, ®Ö? ˆÃÖ ¾ÖŒŸÖ ²ÖÖê»Ö »Ößו֋ÝÖÖ…

SHRI BALAVANT alias BAL APTE:  Even the Ramakrishna Mission was tempted to claim the 'Minority' status because it found that it was a matter of privilege to be a minority, to be above law.  But that is about Article 30, which is a larger issue.  What I am pointing out is, the Statement of Objects & Reasons says that the Constitutional guarantees are there, but still justice is not being done.  And then the Act goes on talking about the minority institutions by defining them in clause (g) of Section 2. The Supreme Court has consistently held that for an institution to be a minority institution, it has to be established and administered by a minority.

The definition contemplates only the establishment of the institution.  The definition is silent about administration.  What is mentioned is "established or maintained".  "Establishing" or "maintaining" is one thing, and "administration" is totally a different thing.  Administration part is missing from the definition.  Therefore, the definition is vitiated with reference to Article 30.

There is another definition, and that definition is of 'minority'.   'Minority' is something which, as the Act says, will be decided by the Central Government.  How can the Central Government decide about what is stated expressly by and is interpreted, as such, by the Constitution and the Supreme Court.  For an institution to be a minority institution, as I said, it is a matter of establishment and administration, and for a minority to be a minority in this country, one attribute is, minorities contemplated in this country are only two, religious and linguistic.  The Supreme Court has held that this is not a matter of all-India conception, but since we have linguistic States, the reference to a minority or the concept of minority is referable to a State, not all-India.

                                                          

SHRI BALAVANT alias BAL APTE (CONTD.):  That is the majority view of the Eleven Judge Bench and that is binding on us, until we have a Constitutional amendment.  That view says, "A reference to minority is necessarily with reference to a State.  A community is a minority community within a State". Now, how can the Central Government decide that?  If at all a Government has to decide, it will be the State Government which would decide.  Therefore, the definition of minority is such that the Central Government would do what it wants without reference to article 30 of the Constitution and with a clear danger of this action being unconstitutional. 

       My next objection to this Bill is on a very small point and I will not elaborate on it.  There is a sub-clause in clause 25 of this Bill.  This clause is given the specious name of "power to remove difficulties".  In other words, by this clause the Executive wants to take over the legislative power of the Parliament.  This is notorious in Administrative Law.  It is known as the Henry viii clause and that is a clause by which the Executive wants to take the initiative from Parliament.    This  clause is introduced in this small Bill.  What are the difficulties that you can't foresee?  If such difficulties arise--fortunately, our Parliament meets very regularly--we can find solutions.  It is not like the British Parliament in the days of Henry viii.  So, why is this Henry viii clause which is draconian in nature?  It really demonstrates the attitude of those in power. 

       Now, the aspect of minority institutions, in a wider context, has to be looked at from the point of the recent history of the field of education.  There we find that, during the last 20 years, with the demand for professional colleges growing, with the State not in a position to have as many professional colleges as is necessary to meet the demands of students--it started with Karnataka and Maharashtra picked it up early, followed by Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu--professional colleges became a business; open up private unaided professional colleges, charge any fees you like, don't give any infrastructure, don't give any facilities and earn money.  That has happened during the last 20 years.  The matter went to the Supreme Court.  At one stage, in 1993, the Supreme Court laid down some principle.  Since the Government did not do anything, the Supreme Court, in the Unnikrishnan case, laid down that there would be free seats, there would be payment seats and there would be support to the poor by way of the rich paying half the fees of the poor.  All that happened.  The institutions went to the Supreme Court claiming that they are minority institutions and that they have a right to admit their own students on the basis of the decision of the Supreme Court in  St. Stephens case.  The Supreme Court tried to find a way out and also, in a way, kept ways out for the institutions, from time to time, providing for what are called the management seats through which money was earned. 

       Sir, in Mumbai, this concept of minority and majority has been given a perverse meaning when we find that Mumbai is the capital of Maharashtra.  So, Marathi is supposed to be the language of the majority.  In Mumbai, institutions run by Gujarati-speaking, Sindhi-speaking, Punjabi-speaking and South Indian languages-speaking people are working.  They never bothered to claim this.  Everybody was governed by the University Act, by the statutes under it, by the UGC and now by the IMC and the AICTE.              

SHRI BALAVANT alias BAL APTE (CONTD):  Incidentally, I do not want to go into that discussion.  The AICTE's approval is considered, by the Supreme Court again,  to be above the approval of the university or the UGC.  Even if the university approves it, if the AICTE does not approve  it, you cannot be a technical institute.  Therefore, reference to the AICTE is now inevitable. That is what the Supreme Court has ruled.

THE MINISTER OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVLOPMENT (SHRI ARJUN SINGH):  I would like to point out one thing that each of these courses in this institution had been approved by the AICTE.  That should not be forgotten.

SHRI BALAVANT alias BAL APTE:  I am not on that.  But whether a reference to the AICTE is necessary, undoubtedly it is.  I am only on that.  Since colleges earn money, we have nothing for the students.  From St. Stephens, 50 per cent students will be of a particular community  which has established the institution.  In Andhra Pradesh, we had the spectacle of students getting converted so that they could get admission.  This was  brought to the notice of the High Court by the Andhra Pradesh Governemnt that this has happened.  They gave statistics.  This is almost embracing another religion so that your bigamy becomes legal.   There are social ramifications also of this attitude by which colleges were run.  In these circumstances, the Supreme Court in the case of T.M.A. Pai and then again in the case of Islamic Academy of Education brought out a formula.  They said that there should be a quota for the minority students.  It may not be 50 per  cent; it may be less or it may be more.  If the particular situation of the college is such that there are more minority students, then it need not be 50 per cent; it can be more also.  But apart from that, the minority institutions would have their own admission procedures and the management will have certain remaining seats to fill in.  *   Sir, cases demonstrated in courts....(Interruptions).

SHRI ANAND SHARMA:  Will you yield for a minute?

SHRI BALAVANT alias BAL APTE:  You will have your say when your turn comes.

SHRI ANAND SHARMA:  When I am speaking, I normally yield. Even yesterday I yielded.

SHRI BALAVANT alias BAL APTE:  I yielded to you the other day.

SHRI ANAND SHARMA:  I will just take a minute.  Sir, what is being referred to here are the Supreme Court rulings and that the Supreme court   *   .  This should not go on record.  I think it is a very serious matter.  It is highly objectionable.

SHRI M.P. ABDUSSAMAD SAMADANI:  Sir, it is highly objectionable.

* Expunged as ordered by the Chair.

SHRI ANAND SHARMA:  Sir, he is casting aspersions on the highest court of the land.  This forum is not meant for that.

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN:  I will examine the record.

SHRI BALAVANT alias BAL APTE:  Sir, this is not an aspersion.

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN:  I will examine the record.

SHRI BALAVANT alias BAL APTE: This is an interpretation to which I am entitled and I have said this before the courts.  It is not that I am speaking here.  I have told the court that this is what is happening.

SHRI R. SHUNMUGASUNDARAM:  He cannot say it  here.

SHRI BALAVANT alias BAL APTE:  In such circumstances, whether the college is properly run with proper infrastructure, with necessary teachers, with necessary equipment, becomes necessary and there comes the role of both the university and the AICTE. 

       Now again under the orders of the Supreme Court -- these days the administrations are run by the Supreme Court almost --  every university now has a Master Plan.  In that Master Plan, the student population is visualised  and according to that the nature of colleges, the number of colleges, the areas where colleges are necessary is to be spelt out by the university.  In that, colleges are permitted to grow or permitted to be affiliated.  In such circumstances, the needs of the area are irrevocably connected with the establishment of a college.

SHRI BALAVANT alias BAL APTE (CONTD.): Now, if that is so, a university becomes a problem for an institution whose motive is not catering to education.  Therefore, now, it is provided for a university of choice.  Why?  This country has so many universities.  Universities function according to certain norms.  Every university has its own standards.  Mumbai University has its own standards.  Pune University has its own standards.  Aligarh University has its own standards.  Every university has its own standards.  And within that area, those standards prevail.  Now, to say that I will stay in that area but I will have a university of my choice, is a perversion of your choice and it is not in the interest either of students or of education.  And the list, in the Schedule, that is made for purposes of this choice is almost a case of res ipsa loquieur.  I will read only this much.  "Colleges all over India seeking affiliation to a university of choice";  and what is the choice today given by this legislation?  The University of Delhi is almost for an apology; the North-Eastern Hill University in Dibrugarh; Pondicherry University; Assam University, Nagaland University, Mizoram University. Res ipsa loquiter!  I will not say anything more on this.

       Sir, therefore, this choice of university has nothing to do with the independence or the protection of minorities.  You want to come out of rules; you want to come out of restrictions which are necessary for purposes of standards.  So, go to a remote university.  The remote university has no experience of such types of colleges and, therefore, it is very easy for you to convince them.  This is not a matter of minority education at all.  This is a matter of institutional vested interest.  And I am, therefore, opposing it.

       Sir, today, insofar as minority institutions and education in them are concerned, there are several unanswered questions which, in fact, it is necessary for the legislature to answer.  And if the legislature does not answer, the Supreme Court is there to legislate.  While deciding the earlier cases which I mentioned, the Supreme Court has kept five questions unanswered which are really basic to matters of education.  I would just point them out and I would urge that, in fact, if the Minister has some interest of education in his mind, let him legislate on this.  The first question is: what is meant by religion?  Article 30 talks about religious and linguistic minorities.  But what is religion?  Can a sect or a denomination claim the status of a religion for purposes of claiming minority status?  The law is not very clear.  Therefore,  Supreme Court had referred this issue to a larger Bench.  But they did not answer it.  The other question is:  What are the indices for treating an educational institution as a minority educational institution?  Is it a minority educational institution because a person of minority established it?  Or, is it a minority educational institution because it is administered by persons of minority?  Question is raised; it is not answered.  The third question is: where can a minority institution be operationally located?  Can such an institution in one State admit students of their community from other States?  This has happened.  You establish a university in Andhra Pradesh, claiming to be a Tamil minority institution, and then admit students from Tamil Nadu.  Can you do that?  That is the question which is raised, and which continues to be unanswered.  And who becomes a member of the management of the minority institution? Is it those only from one State or from all States?  Is it possible for an institution to claim minority status in a State when, in fact, it is managed by persons belonging to other States where they are not in minority?

SHRI BALAVANT alias BAL APTE (CONTD.): The question is, whether such an institution is really a minority institution. Can a non-minority in one State, a linguistic non-minority in one State, claim minority status in another? Sir, there, while discussing or dealing with the question of minority education, it is necessary to answer these questions; otherwise, the law as it stands will be taken disadvantage of by these institutions which even today they are doing.

       Sir, there are certain wider implications which I want to point out to this august House, and those implications are, why is this protection to the minorities? Ultimately, if the society is to be a society as a whole, then this protection to the minorities which should lead to that integration of all the sections of the society and, then, Sir, I have to point out two things. One is, the international document which talks about minority rights, particularly the last declaration, namely, the Declaration of the Rights of Persons belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities, 1992. Incidentally, Sir, our country does not have any national or ethnic minorities. We are one people, but we have religious and linguistic minorities. But, in a preamble to this Declaration, what the United Nations say is, "Emphasising that the constant promotion and realisation of the rights of persons belonging to national, ethnic, linguistic, religious minorities as an integral part of the development of society as a whole." So, protection of minorities is an integral part of the development of the society as a whole. If we continue to segregate everything, are we going to achieve that? That is one question on the basis of this.

       Sir, we have two reports. One is by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, which was reported in September, 2001, where they suggest that education system should not just be fair to minorities. They should promote a spirit of equality and tolerance among ethnic and cultural groups. Then, there is a Report on minority rights in education in Estonia, Latvia, Romania and Macedonia. It is concluded that learning apart, †»ÖÝÖ-†»ÖÝÖ, does not encourage living together and that, there is a danger of a strictly mono-lingual, mono-religious, mono-cultural or even mono-racial approach leading to ghettoisation of minorities.

       Sir, looking from the national perspective, I believe, while talking only about minority rights, we must consider that ultimately we don't want the minorities to be ghettoised, but it should be a matter of equality and tolerance among all the communities.

MR. DEPUTY CHAIRMAN: Mr. Apte, you have already taken 30 minutes of the allotted time to your party. There is one more speaker from your party.

SHRI BALAVANT alias BAL APTE: Lastly, there is one sad aspect to this. Why is this unnecessary legislation which really is mad, or, is there any method in this madness? Sir, I believe, when I look at the performance of this Government during the last six months, I would say this. You repealed the POTA; you gave prizes to Isharat Jehan, posthumously, who was a terrorist, died along with the terrorists; you offered five per cent reservation on communal basis to the Muslims; you glossed over the threat of Bangladeshi infiltration.         

 

SHRI BALAVANT alias BAL APTE (contd.): There is a reply given by a Minister to a House of Parliament, which is sought to be negated by a statement outside Parliament. Sir, we have an NGO claiming to be an NGO which is, in fact, not an NGO but a private limited company with allegations that it is funded from Saudi Arabia, and the president of that NGO sits on several prestigious committees of the HRD Ministry, and their slogan is accused must be punished. So, we want the law of this country to stand on its head  when the law says that an accused is innocent until he is proved to be guilty in a competent court.

¯ÖÏÖê0 ÃÖî±ãú§üß®Ö ÃÖÖê•Ö : ‹®Ö•Ö߆Öê ²ÖŸÖÖ‡‹ ®Ö ÛúÖî®Ö Æîü?

SHRI BALAVANT alias BAL APTE: You want to say that an accused should be punished. I believe, there is a method in this madness. (Interruptions)

¯ÖÏÖê0 ÃÖî±ãú§üß®Ö ÃÖÖê•Ö : ‹®Ö•Ö߆Öê ÛúÖ ®ÖÖ´Ö ²ÖŸÖÖ®ÖÖ ¯Ö›ÍêüÝÖÖ…

SHRI BALAVANT alias BAL APTE: I believe, there is a method in this madness and this kind of an approach will not integrate anybody, but will divide the country. This you are doing only for the purposes of gaining temporarily some votes because those votes are not going to last you for long. Thank you.                             (Ends)