Higher education minister K T Jaleel insisted in the Assembly on Thursday that neither he nor his personal staff had any role in the moderation given for engineering students in Mahatma Gandhi University, and said the extra marks given to a Kerala Technical University Student after a third valuation was “rightly deserved”.
The opposition, on the other hand, said the minister's actions were violative of rules, and smacked of corruption and nepotism. Congress legislator V D Satheesan, who sought leave to move an adjournment motion on the marks controversy, said Jaleel should be sacked as higher education minister for his repeated interference in the administrative and academic matters of universities.
The opposition staged a walkout when Speaker P Sreeramakrishnan refused to adjourn the House and hold an exclusive discussion on the marks issue.
The higher education minister said it was the MG University syndicate that decided to give five marks as moderation to MG University engineering students. “Neither me nor my office staff has any role in this,” Jaleel said.
Mysterious presence at 'adalat'
But he accepted responsibility for the one mark given to a student of the Technical University, and suggested that it was the morally right thing to do. The student had come to the 'adalat' with a photostat copy of his answer sheet, the minister said.
The way Jaleel put it, it was as if the student was a supernatural presence at the 'adalat'. “Anyone who had seen his face would have doubted whether it was radiance or fire that emanated from his eyes,” Jaleel said.
The student told the minister that he would have passed the examination had his paper been valued properly. “We asked his marks for other subjects,” Jaleel said. “It was more than 91 per cent. So I gave the answer sheet to some experts who were there at the 'adalat'. Their preliminary assessment was that it deserved a third valuation,” the minister said.
That was how an expert team was appointed to carry out the revaluation. “The marks catapulted him to the fifth rank. He got this on merit,” Jaleel said. He also mentioned that the student, Sree Hari, was the son of a Devaswom Board sweeper. He said Sree Hari lost out only because of the negligence of certain teachers who did the valuation. “The university has already initiated a probe into actions of these teachers,” Jaleel said.
On the spot revaluation
Congress leader V D Satheesan, during his turn, was stingingly sarcastic. “The original mark that the student got was 28 and when this was given for revaluation, the mark improved to 32. This, anyone would agree, was not much of a difference,” he said.
“It was at this moment that the 'boy with fire in his eyes' came with a complaint to the minister. The minister constituted a revaluation committee on the spot. Is that how revaluation is conducted,” Satheesan asked.
The third valuation took the mark to 48, and Sree Hari bagged the fifth rank. The minister mentioned the fifth rank to perhaps make the opposition realise how wrong it would have been to deny Sree Hari a third valuation. Satheesan but ridiculed the rank aspect. Mainly because, according to him, a third valuation was improper after the 'pass board' had ratified the results.
Engineering students and 'suply'
“My friend's son had an aggregate of 93 per cent in his engineering examination. But he failed for one subject. When his application for revaluation was rejected by the university, he wrote a supplementary examination. If this mark was taken into account, he would have got the first rank. A student who had taken a supplementary test will not be eligible for a rank,” Satheesan said.
In effect, Satheesan was implying that the student should have written a supplementary examination.
Satheesan was more critical of the post-moderation of five marks for MG University engineering students. A student had first taken part in the 'adalat' asking for a grace mark of one. According to Satheesan, the student came forward with the request after having already received grace marks in the earlier semesters, and even moderation.
Syndicate marks bazaar
“The 'adalat' still grants the one mark. When the decision was forwarded to the vice-chancellor, he sent it to the Academic Council. While the council decision was pending, the syndicate convened. Now that the minister had sought one mark for a student, the syndicate members too wanted more marks for their chosen wards. If one wanted two marks, another member wanted three and yet another insisted on four for his student. Eventually, it was decided that all B.Tech students would get five marks for any subject that the student had failed in any of the semesters,” Satheesan said.
He asked how a minster can take up a case that was rejected by the VC, was still pending with the Academic Council, and which was turned down by the section concerned of the university. “Right from the time he took over, Jaleel had been attempting to interfere in the academic and administrative affairs of universities,” Satheesan said.
PG with free BCom
He also listed out other instances of such meddling by the minister in university affairs. The minister's personal staff are found in valuation camps, he said. The minister includes the dean in the examination management system; earlier the conduct of examinations was solely the examination controller's responsibility. “The dean, incidentally, is the classmate of the minister's private secretary,” Satheesan said.
In yet another instance, Satheesan said it was found that a person doing his post-graduation in physical education had not cleared his BCom. “In the normal course, the candidate should have been debarred. But our large-hearted minister instructed that the person be given enough marks to get him over the BCom hurdle,” Satheesan said.
Mistaken identity
Jaleel chose not to respond to any of the charges made by Satheesan. But clearly to turn the tables on his former party, the Muslim League, he said that in 2012, when League leader Abid Hussain Thangal was a syndicate member, the Calicut University had decided to grant 20 marks as moderation for engineering students.
Opposition leader Ramesh Chennithala said it was done because there was a problem with the 2004 engineering scheme. “But it was done only after following the necessary process and also after being instructed by the All India Council for Technical Education,” Chennithala said.
Kottakkal MLA Abid Hussain Thangal, too, wanted his say. “There were definite reasons why 20 marks were awarded in 2012 but the fact is I was not a syndicate member at the time this happened,” he said and asked the Speaker to remove Jaleel's “misleading statement” from the Assembly records.
Jaleel just sat smiling and made a gesture with his hands that vaguely suggested that he could not believe that he had made a mistake.
