Pala: The Vice Chancellor’s statement against the BVM College of Cherpunkal is immaterial and contradictory. In a press release issued by the Diocese in connection with the University inquiry into the death of a private student who had written the examination at Cherpunkal College, he said that those who know the basic lessons of education and those who are familiar with the statutes of MG University cannot be blamed except to appreciate the work of the Principal.
According to the rules of the MG University statute, CCTV is owned by management, which the college management argues not to release CCTV footage. Does the university intend not to make use of the visuals to expose the truth-seekers to the fact that the principal-principal principal is painfully misinterpreted and brutally criticized?
The invigilator and the principal spoke calmly and gently, without even raising the child, so that the child would not be humiliated after being caught by the police. It was also argued that the boy should be summoned immediately and taken to his office. For a few minutes, the counselor, now in charge of the Vice Chancellor’s office, gave the boy, through the college’s leading teacher, a reminder that the boy would not be depressed. This is also evident on CC TV. The teacher did the job efficiently. That is why the child has been accused of putting too much time in the hall.
Not even a conscientious person has ever said that Cherpunkal College Principal is a gentleman who has great experience as a teacher and principal of Pala St. Thomas College in Kerala. The Vice-Chancellor may feel that if he has adhered to the law of the University in its entirety and has shown great human compassion, his mistake is a college Catholic institution and the Principal Catholic priest will interpret his good deeds as evil.
It was also interpreted that the public display of a child’s hall ticket was a gross violation. Former vice-chancellors, including lawyers, are not aware that there is a law not to display the ticket. What is shown here is a copy of the hall ticket and a copy. Otherwise, even honest people would have been forced to believe that the management had written on the other side of the hall. The Vice-Chancellor, who held a press conference on the provisional report of the syndicate subcommittee, which examined the documents, including the hall ticket, did not take any witnesses.
Only if the syndicate is ready to accept the full report of the subcommittee, which is the University’s, can anyone reasonably suspect that the VC is in a hurry? No VC has ever held such a press conference on such matters.
The death of a child is very sad. Similarly, it is very regrettable to glorify the principal. The Principal has his own personality, similar to that of the Vice-Chancellor. In fact, the Vice-Chancellor has insulted the entire teaching community. He wants to be the custodian and administrator of the entire university, and it is of interest to the community to know what he means to the teaching community. Should he mean to encourage coping, or to passively pass on such occasions? The statement stated that he was requested to prepare for a public debate to clarify his position on the matter.
