ABVP seeks judicial probe into Rohith’s death

Posted Posted in News


‘Ultra leftists’ accused of instigating students using the caste card

The Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) has demanded a judicial enquiry into the suicide of RohithVemula at the University of Hyderabad to bring out the ‘real’ truth behind the entire episode.

The ABVP all-India general secretary Vinay Bidre accused ‘ultra leftists’ working on the campus of misleading the nation and instigating students using the caste card. “Rohith’s suicide was unfortunate and we feel extremely sad about it. What was an issue between two student groups has been given a caste colour and a group of people are using the emotions to blame ABVP,” he said at a press conference here on Wednesday.

He said the ABVP will launch a ‘truth campaign’ across the country in all universities, colleges and expose the real truth also through roadside meetings till February 2. “We were not active in expressing our views all these days to respect Rohith and not exploit the emotions,” he said. We want to expose the Ambedkar Students Association that is defaming Dr. Ambedkar by twisting his ideology and supporting anti-national elements. Mr. Bidre also alleged some teachers with Maoist ideology and those who openly support terrorists were infusing anti-national feelings among students. Police should enquire about the non-boarders staying on the campus and discreetly working to poison the atmosphere, he said adding that an inquiry was needed to study the role of some teachers in poisoning the minds of students using caste and religion.

Mr. Bidre said he was surprised by the change in the police stand on the attack on Sushil Kumar and wanted to know if they were influenced by any and whom. “We have the FIR copy where police clearly admitted that Sushil was attacked and now they changed their stand.” The entire episode should be enquired by a judicial commission and ABVP was ready to provide the details it has on the case. He argued that there was not much support to the agitators from the HCU students and majority wants class work to go on but some groups are threatening them with attacks if they raise their voice.

Some teachers with Maoist ideology and those who openly support terrorists are infusing anti-national feelings among students.

                                                                                                                                                           Vinay Bidre

                                                                                                                                    ABVP All-India General Secretary


Are We In Our Country?

Posted Posted in Articles, News

Truth has become yet again causality in the implosion of frenzied emotions.

Pakistan had orchestrated serial bomb blasts in Mumbai through its stooges and massacred 300 innocent Indians in cold blood. Yakub Memon, who played a major role in the massacre, was hanged last year after two decades of procrastination. All Indians are happy with the dispensation of justice, though delayed. But the minions of Pakistan, moldy minded pseudo- intellectuals and some crooked politicians in India howled at the top of their lungs for hanging a convicted traitor.

Hyderabad Central University has come into focus in the wake of protests staged by the fans of Yakub Memon in the university campus for his hanging. In the sanctum sanctorum of the temple of learning, they held prayer meetings for the traitor who slaughtered hundreds of innocents, they howled and wailed beating chest condoling his death in funeral processions holding placards displaying ‘if one Yakut Memon is hanged every house will have a YakubMemon’. This made the onlookers dumb founded.

A student from the same university took a serious umbrage to these activities. He did not hinder or block the actions of admirers and fans of Yakub Memon. Neither, he physically assaulted any one, nor he scold any one. Simply, he had posted Facebook status expressing his anguish in his own way as to how heinous it was for these rowdy elements to indulge in violent protests in the university campus for this cause. There is nothing objectionable in it. If a traitor can be openly supported and can be eulogized as a martyr by a group of students, why does this student not have a similar freedom of expression to condemn it?

Yakub’s aficionados did not think so. In a midnight attack on his room in the hostel assault, a gang of thirty fanatic followers of Yakub assaulted the student. How grievously was he hurt is immaterial here. It is admitted by these student leaders themselves that the student was dragged out his room, beaten black and blue, dragged him to the security post and made him apologize for the post on Facebook and forced him to remove his comments.

Is it not high-handedness and tyrannical? One can understand if this incident had happened in Pakistan’s Hyderabad where a Pakistani was hanged by India and if an Indian student there supported the hanging and Pakistani students assaulted him. It is the state of affairs there and it may be seen as a reflection of fierce nationalist sentiments of the people of Pakistan. Don’t we have the freedom to express nationalist views and condemn the anti-national elements in universities in our country? Are the human rights and constitutional rights meant only for anti-nationals and not for nationalists?

The particular student who was attacked is form an ordinary backward class family. He belongs to a caste that qualifies him for the so-called ‘social justice’ sloganeered by our great intellectuals day in and day out. His mother tried to get justice for her son from the university. The anti-national elements in the university obstructed her efforts to get justice. She was forced to knock the doors of court of law, which sought an explanation from university. University suspended five of the students form the hostel. When the protests were going on against the suspensions, one of them unfortunately committed suicide.

Whole of India focused its attention on the university since then. Everybody is expressing freely their own views on the happenings at university and the background of the unfortunate suicide. There is nothing wrong in it. One cannot overrule ones expressions. One cannot insult one’s sentiments and emotions. The merits and demerits of those arguments are not a point of debate.

Mother of the student who committed suicide confirmed that their caste is ‘vaddera’. His father confirmed that this caste falls under BC communities. If this is true, the dead student was not a Dalit. Media propaganda that the student was a dalit scholar is undoubtedly false.

Well, it is not appropriate to say that the brewing agitation regarding the injustice to Dalits is not correct just because the dead student Rohit was not a Dalit. The same sense of social injustice and inequality that is bothering the Dalit students elsewhere in the country is also acutely paining the Dalit students and faculty of this university too.

There is no doubt that these feelings have to be understood with necessary sympathy and solidarity by all those who strive for the welfare of the society and try to mollify their mental agony. There are many reasons for this accumulated impatience and dissatisfaction among Dalits. There could be many mistakes by university too and some of its decisions and actions may be inappropriate. The manner in which Dalit students were suspended is not beyond suspicion. All these matters should be investigated thoroughly. Culprits, whoever they may be, should be punished. The atmosphere of unrest dominating in the university campus should be put to an end and the undesirable tendencies must be stopped.

There can be no second thought on this. However, the common man who is witnessing how the university campus has become a political battle field has simple questions. Aren’t the misdeeds committed by the admirers of Yakub Memon responsible for the whole problem? Why nobody is talking about it? Don’t we have to punish the perpetrator for destroying the sanctity of the university campus? Don’t we need to condemn the attack on the student who questioned these? When Islamic terrorism is spreading its wings worldwide through ISIS agents and some of those agents are caught in Hyderabad and many other places and when Pakistan’s direct attack on Pathankot stunned the country, if institutions of higher learning become arena for terrorist supporters, shouldn’t we consider this as a serious national security issue?

If bad policies of university officials are detrimental to students’ interests, they can protest for resolutions. Student bodies have every right to fight for taking strong action against officers responsible for injustice; they can go to any extent within their limits.

One fails to understand why to drag the union ministers in to it? If a student union brings to his notice the anti-national activities of the supporters of Yakub Memon what is wrong on the part of  Minister Dattatreya to write a letter to the concerned ministry to verify facts and take steps to stop such anti-national activities? Isn’t it his responsibility as a Member of Parliament representing the local people? Has this letter anything to do with the legitimate agitations by the Dalit students and Dalit faculty for their grievances and rights. Is it not a treason to eulogize and take out demonstrations in praise of a condemned terrorist who is responsible for massacre of hundreds of people? Isn’t it the bounden duty of Human Resources Minister to instruct university to examine the complaint by fellow minister and take necessary action? Considering the importance of matter, is it wrong to follow up periodically after six months on the status? How can it be termed as applying pressure on university to initiate inappropriate decisions? Is there a proof to show that the minister asked to take specific action against specific person? If that is not the case, why should the central minister be criticized? When the entire episode is wrongly portrayed as injustice against Dalits, is it wrong if the minister clarifies that it is not a Dalit versus non-Dalits issue?

When the student in his suicide note itself clearly indicated that no one is responsible for his death and asked not to bother anyone for his death, what kind of logic it is to insinuate that the central ministers are responsible for his death and demand for the inclusion of their names in the FIR and for their resignation?

We should note that Rohit who committed suicide was not a coward. He was brave enough to proclaim that he would tear away any saffron flag that he sees and that he hates ABVP, RSS and Hinduism. He was a wise man who could find out that Vivekananda is a pseudo intellectual. It is difficult to believe that such a person committed suicide frightened by a single letter from Dattatreya and by normal reminders form ministry to the university. It is hard to believe that he would have decided to stop his just fight abruptly and commit suicide. It is preposterous to assume that ministers Smriti Irani or Bandaru Dattatreya came in an invisible form to put a noose to his neck. There must be some strong reason behind his desperate suicide. What is it?

“ASA , SFI anything and everything exists for its own sake. Seldom the interest of a person and the organizations match’. (ASA- Ambedkar Student Association, SFI – Student Federation of India)”

This is what Rohit wrote in his suicide note and struck it out on his own! When student unions are insisting for inclusion of names of two central ministers in FIR, is it not appropriate to look into the role of those student unions whose names were referred in the suicide by Rohit? The Hindu reported that the sim card used by Rohit was missing. Did Smriti Irani came down form sky and took away the sim?

Is it not necessary to have a thorough investigation on all these doubts on the suicide? Is it that even the criminal punishments should be handed own people as desired by the student unions even before the investigation?

CM Kejriwal may have several political issues and hostilities with Smriti Irani in Delhi politics. He may have seen this issue as an good opportunity to express his resentment against her and Modi government, so grabbed this like a loaf of fish by a hungry cat. Part time politician Rahul Gandhi may want to bring down Modi government before goes to jail in National Herald case and get power back. Other political powers, which were ‘impatient’ before Bihar elections may want to bury BJP in the coming election in state. There is nothing wrong in assuming that all these are craving to get political mileage from the unfortunate death of a student. Whatever may be the plans of the political vultures waiting for opportunity to bring down Modi government, how come the university students and their unions allow themselves to be pawns in their political games? Is it appropriate to demand for removal of central ministers without investigation even after suspension of students is revoked? Do student agitators determine who should be the ministers in the central government?

We cannot foresee what twists and turns this matter may take at this stage. It is true that if writing a letter by central a minster to another minister itself is a crime punishable under SC, ST Atrocities Act and if it is an offense to say supporting and eulogizing a Pakistani traitor is wrong, where will this lead us to? The situation begs the basic question – Are we in our country?

Indian President’s Address To Nation on The Eve Of Republic Day 2016

Posted Posted in Articles, News

My Fellow Citizens:

  1. On the eve of the sixty-seventh Republic Day of our nation, I extend my warm greetings to all of you in India and abroad. I convey my special greetings to members of our Armed Forces, Para-military Forces and Internal Security Forces. I pay my tribute to the brave soldiers who made the supreme sacrifice of their lives in defending India’s territorial integrity and in upholding the rule of law.

Fellow Citizens:

  1. On twenty-sixth January 1950, our Republic was born. On this day, we gave ourselves the Constitution of India. This day saw the culmination of heroic struggle of an extraordinary generation of leaders who overcame colonialism to establish the world’s largest democracy. They pulled together India’s amazing diversity to build national unity, which has brought us so far. The enduring democratic institutions they established have given us the gift of continuity on the path of progress. India today is a rising power, a country fast emerging as a global leader in science, technology, innovation and start-ups, and whose economic success is the envy of the world.

Fellow Citizens:

  1. The year 2015 has been a year of challenges. During this year, the global economy remained subdued. Unpredictability ruled the commodity markets. Uncertainty marked the institutional responses. In such troubled environment, no one nation could be an oasis of growth. India’s economy also had to face the blowback. Weak investor sentiments led to withdrawal of funds from emerging markets including India putting pressure on the Indian rupee. Our exports suffered. Our manufacturing sector is yet to recover fully.
  1. In 2015, we were also denied the bounty of nature. While large parts of India were affected by severe drought, other areas reeled under devastating floods. Unusual weather conditions impacted our agricultural production. Rural employment and income levels suffered.

Fellow Citizens:

  1. We can call out these challenges because we are aware of them. There is a great virtue in acknowledging a problem and resolving to address it. India is building and implementing strategies to solve these problems. This year, with an estimated growth rate of 7.3 percent, India is poised to become the fastest growing large economy. Contraction in global oil prices has helped maintain external sector stability and control domestic prices. Despite occasional setbacks, industrial performance this year has been strong.
  1. Aadhaar, with its present reach of 96 crore people, is helping in direct transfer of benefits, plugging leakages and improving transparency. Over 19 crore bank accounts opened under the Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana is the single largest exercise in the world at financial inclusion. The Saansad Adarsh Gram Yojana aims to create model villages. The Digital India programme is an effort to bridge the digital divide. The Pradhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojana targets farmer’s welfare. Increased spending on programmes like MGNREGA is aimed at enhancing employment generation to rejuvenate the rural economy.
  1. The Make-in-India campaign will boost manufacturing by facilitating easy conduct of business and improving competitiveness of domestic industry. The Start-up India programme will foster innovation and encourage new-age entrepreneurship. The National Skill Development Mission envisages skilling 300 million youth by 2022.
  1. There will be, amongst us, occasional doubters and baiters. Let us continue to complain; to demand; to rebel. This too is a virtue of democracy. But let us also applaud what our democracy has achieved. With investments in infrastructure, manufacturing, health, education, science and technology, we are positioning ourselves well for achieving a higher growth rate which will in the next ten to fifteen years help us eliminate poverty.

Fellow Citizens:

  1. Reverence for the past is one of the essential ingredients of nationalism. Our finest inheritance, the institutions of democracy, ensure to all citizens justice, equality, and gender and economic equity. When grim instances of violence hit at these established values which are at the core of our nationhood, it is time to take note. We must guard ourselves against the forces of violence, intolerance and unreason.

Fellow Citizens:

  1. For revitalizing the forces of growth, we need reforms and progressive legislation. It is the bounden duty of the law makers to ensure that such legislation is enacted after due discussion and debate. A spirit of accommodation, cooperation and consensus-building should be the preferred mode of decision-making. Delays in decision-making and implementation can only harm the process of development.

Fellow Citizens:

  1. Peace is the primary objective of a rational consciousness as well as our moral universe. It is the foundation of civilization and a necessity for economic progress. And yet, we have never been able to answer a simple question: why does peace remain so elusive? Why has peace been so much more difficult to attain than degenerate conflict?
  1. As the twentieth century closed down with a remarkable revolution in science and technology, we had some reason for optimism that the twenty-first century would mark an era in which the energies of people and nations would be committed to a rising prosperity that would eliminate, for the first time, the curse of extreme poverty. That optimism has faded in the first fifteen years of this century. There is unprecedented turbulence across vast regions, with alarming increase in regional instabilities. The scourge of terrorism has reshaped war into its most barbaric manifestation. No corner can now consider itself safe from this savage monster.
  1. Terrorism is inspired by insane objectives, motivated by bottomless depths of hatred, instigated by puppeteers who have invested heavily in havoc through the mass murder of innocents. This is war beyond any doctrine, a cancer which must be operated out with a firm scalpel. There is no good or bad terrorism; it is pure evil.

Fellow Citizens:

  1. Nations will never agree on everything; but the challenge today is existential. Terrorists seek to undermine order by rejecting the very basis of strategic stability, which are recognized borders. If outlaws are able to unravel borders, then we are heading towards an age of chaos. There will be disputes among nations; and, as is well-known, the closer we are to a neighbour the higher the propensity for disputes. There is a civilized way to bridge disagreement; dialogue, ideally, should be a continual engagement. But we cannot discuss peace under a shower of bullets.
  1. We on our subcontinent have a historic opportunity to become a beacon to the world at a time of great danger. We must attempt to resolve the complex edges of our emotional and geo-political inheritance with our neighbours through a peaceful dialogue, and invest in mutual prosperity by recognizing that human beings are best defined by a humane spirit, and not their worst instincts. Our example can be its own message to a world in anxious need of amity.

Fellow Citizens:

  1. Each of us has the right to lead a healthy, happy and productive life in India. This right has been breached, especially in our cities, where pollution has reached alarming levels. Climate change has acquired real meaning with 2015 turning out to be the warmest year on record. Multiple strategies and actions at various levels is necessary. Innovative solutions of urban planning, use of clean energy, and changing the mindsets of the people call for active participation of all stakeholders. Permanence of such changes can be ensured only if people own these changes.

Fellow Citizens:

  1. Love for one’s motherland is the basis of all progress. Education, with its enlightening effect, leads to human progress and prosperity. It helps us develop forces of spirit which can revive lost hopes and ignored values. Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan had said and I quote: “End-product of education should be a free creative man who can battle against historical circumstances and adversities of nature” (unquote). The advent of the “Fourth Industrial Revolution” demands that this free and creative man should also be able to master the velocity of change to absorb disruptions which are getting embedded in the systems and societies. An eco-system that fosters critical thinking and makes teaching intellectually stimulating is necessary. It must inspire scholarship and encourage unfettered respect for knowledge and teachers. It must instill a spirit of reverence towards women that will guide social conduct of an individual throughout his life. It must breed a culture of deep thought and create an environment of contemplation and inner peace. Through an open-minded approach to the wider spectrum of ideas emanating from within, our academic institutions must become world-class. A beginning has already been made with two Indian institutes of higher education finding place in the top two hundred in international rankings.

Fellow Citizens:

  1. The generational change has happened. Youth have moved centre-stage to take charge. March ahead with Tagore’s words from Nutan Yuger Bhore:



Move ahead, the roll of drums announce your triumphal march;

With feet of glory, you shall cut out your own path;

Delay not, delay not, a new age dawns.

Thank you.

Jai Hind!

Chain of Events At University Before Rohit Vemula’s Suicide

Posted Posted in Articles, News


We feel greatly saddened to report the unfortunate suicide committed by one of our research scholar, Mr. Rohit Vemula, working for Ph.D. in Centre for Knowledge Culture and Innovation Studies.  He was one of the five students who were asked to vacate hostel due on account of an incident that took place at night of 3rd and 4th August 2015. Incidentally, all five of them are Dalit students. It all happened when there was an alleged attack by a group of students in one of the hostels, on a student by name, Mr. Susheel Kumar, School of Humanities.

Mr. Susheel Kumar, the then President of the ABVP Unit on campus, was allegedly attacked by a group of students belonging to Ambedkar Students’ Association (ASA) during that intervening night. The Proctorial Board of University had inquired into the matter and submitted an interim report before talking to victim and a final report after talking to victim. When an Executive council (EC) approved the punishment to expel five students (including Mr. Rohit Vemula), the ASA students did not allow university administration to function for two days consecutively forcing the then in-charge Vice-Chancellor, Prof. R.P. Sharma, to withdraw the order; however, with a condition that the matter will be looked into afresh.

Accordingly, a committee was constituted by Prof. Sharma but the committee replied back, after Prof. Appa Rao took over the charge as the Vice-Chancellor at end of September 2015, indicating that recommendations of the statutory bodies like Proctorial Board and Executive Council cannot be reviewed by such a committee.

Meanwhile, Mr. Susheel Kumar’s (victim) mother filed a case in the High Court and it was repeatedly asking the University Legal Counsel to inform the action taken on recommendations of Proctorial Board. In the middle of November 2015, the High Court had ordered the University Legal Counsel to submit the action taken report with a few days’ deadline. Otherwise, the Judge was taking matter seriously. The University had a meeting of Deans and Administrative Officers of University in which Controller of Examinations, Chief Warden and Dean of Students’ Welfare (DSW) were also a part. It was decided that in given circumstances, an EC Sub-committee headed by Senior most Professor on EC as chairperson will examine the matter and submit recommendations.

Since none of the EC members were from Dalit community, we had requested the Dean of Students’ Welfare (Prof. P. Prakash Babu) to be part of EC Sub-committee. He is also a statutory officer of the university. We had also asked the Chief Proctor and others to give inputs to committee. The committee had very short time as deadline was approaching fast.

The EC Sub-committee, after fairly long deliberations and after consulting University security and local Police Officers, upheld the recommendations of the Proctorial Board and recommended to EC that the said five students be awarded punishment as recommended earlier.

At the full EC meeting which was held on 27 November 2015, the VC proposed to EC to be a bit lenient because the recommended punishment will deprive students of scholarships to continue Ph.D. after one semester expulsion recommended by the Proctorial Board. As Chairman of EC, the VC had taken DSW into confidence, and reduced the scale of punishment to benefit students. The full EC agreed to VC’s proposal to be lenient but as a regular practice followed in university for several years, it was indicated that these students will be permitted in respective schools/departments/centres, library and academic meetings but not in the hostel, administration and public places on campus as part of groups.

The decision of EC was submitted in writing to university legal counsel. It was communicated to students, after the said EC minutes were approved by members. First, the minutes were posted on university website and later the formal orders were issued to students concerned.

The chief warden communicated the same to students around 20th December 2015 and asked them to vacate the hostel. He had double-locked the rooms wherever required and submitted a report to university. The DSW was in touch with students.

Subsequently, on behalf of students, there was a group of students who met the VC and demanded revocation of hostel suspension as they felt it was a ‘social boycott’. They were linking this punishment to letter from the Hon’ble Minister, Sri Bandaru Dattatreya (enquiring about the August 3/4, 2015 night incident) forwarded by MHRD. It was adequately explained to students that the letter received from MHRD or the minister’s letter had no influence whatsoever on said EC decision.

Later, all five expelled students from hostel, moved to Hon’ble High Court seeking stay on hostel suspension. The Hon’ble High Court Judge observed that this petition be heard together with the one which was already in front of court on the same matter (filed by Susheel’s mother) and posted it for January 19, 2016. We understood the matter, therefore, as sub judice. Further, it was felt that the earlier decision of EC in September 2015 was already reviewed by EC on a letter given by the students. Hence, the decision of EC, this time as Appellate Authority, can only be reviewed by the court was our opinion and maintained the same in our discussions with the students.

the five students suspended from the hostels were eligible for fellowships. Two of them get regular JRF/SRF with HRA eligibility and other three were getting non-NET fellowship. In fact, one Mr. Sunkanna, School of Humanities, among these five students, has even submitted his thesis after August 2015.

On Jan 03, 2016, these students decided to protest as ‘Sleep in Open’ at the shopping complex of university. They erected a small tent and started sleeping at there. Three of them were found sleeping at shopping complex.

The DSW was regularly discussing with these students and counseling them to have patience to know the court’s decision in this regard. Meanwhile, a student JAC, including the students’ union represented by SFI, was building pressure on the university. On 13th January 2016, when regular VC was away, the members of the JAC closed down the administration building and did not allow employees to enter it.

They demanded that the regular VC should come, revoke suspension and then only they will agree. The VC advanced his return journey and reached the campus on January 13th night (cancelling appointments in Delhi) and called for a meeting of EC members, senior deans and DSW on 14th January 2016 morning on the course of action to be taken. It was decided that there will be an oral appeal, followed by a written appeal to the students to allow the administration to function. However, in the event the students did not listen, the university would take help from police to allow university to function. However, the class work was not affected on 13th and 14th January 2016.

On January 14th morning, by 12.20 pm or so, they allowed employees to get in after we issued a written appeal and sent our security officer to local police station seeking formal help. Subsequently, the VC talked to representatives of JAC along with president of the students’ union for about 2 hours and explained the position. It was repeatedly appealed to JAC members that they should wait for court’s decision on a matter that was sub judice.

The expelled students were not part of this JAC. The expelled students continued to sleep in the tent. On Sunday morning, January 17, 2016, it was realized that the JAC erected a tent and was planning to announce some form of hunger strike. The VC, registrar, DSW and other senior faculty members discussed the matter and were planning to speak to students once again to avoid hunger strike.

All of a sudden at 7 pm on 17th January 2016, the sad news broke out and campus was disturbed. The suicide note left behind the deceased had no mention about this hostel expulsion. The deputy commissioner of police of area suggested that the Chief Proctor, DSW and the VC should move out of campus with family.

The rest of events on the campus in this regard have been reported regularly by print and electronic media on 18th and 19th January 2016.

The matter was supposed to come up on 19th January 2016 in the High Court and somehow it did not come up today. At present, we do not know when the matter will come up next.

Further, the MHRD has sent a two-member fact finding committee to university to interact with stakeholders and report back to ministry. The committee has started its interactions on the campus.

This university had earlier resolved critical issues and this issue also needs to be resolved through discussions with university administration. The vice-chancellor has, therefore, appealed to everyone in university to allow regular class work to be taken up immediately especially when there is a tight academic schedule to complete in the shortened semester. The senior teachers at university are willing to pave way for discussions on matters concerning this incident with administration.

రోహిత్ : నిజా నిజాలు నిగ్గుతేలాలి!

Posted Posted in Articles, News


రోహిత్ది సైద్ధాంతికంగా ఉన్నత భావాలు గల వ్యక్తిత్వం. ఏబీవీపీతో వివాదాస్పద సంఘటన క్యాంప్సకే పరిమితం కావాలని, చర్చల ద్వారా పరిష్కరించుకుందామని తన మిత్రులకు సూచించాడు. తానే స్వయంగా ఏబీవీపీ నాయకుడు సుశీల్ కుమార్కు ఇదే విషయాన్ని ప్రతిపాదించాడు కూడా. ఇది నచ్చని ఏఎ్సఏ నాయకులు దీన్ని ఒక రాజకీయ అంశంగా, జాతీయస్థాయికి తీసుకెళ్ళాలని కులవాదంతో దీన్ని కొనసాగించాలని తీసుకున్న నిర్ణయాన్ని కూడా రోహిత్ వ్యతిరేకించాడు. అంశాలు రోహిత్ సూసైడ్ నోట్ను విశ్లేషిస్తే అవగతమౌతుంది.

హైదరాబాద్‌ సెంట్రల్‌ యూనివర్సిటీ విద్యార్థి రోహిత్‌ వేముల ఆత్మహత్య అందిరినీ కలచివేసిన సంఘటన. అతని కుటుంబానికి ప్రతి ఒక్కరు అండగా నిలబడాల్సిన సమయం ఇది. మనోధైర్యాన్ని కల్పించాల్సిన బాధ్యత కూడా మనపై వుంది. ఈ సంఘటన పూర్వాపరాలను పరిశీలించని వారు ఒకే కోణంలో విషయాన్ని పదే పదే ప్రస్తావించడం బాధాకరం. విద్యాలయాల్లో ముఖ్యంగా యూనివర్సిటీ క్యాంప్‌సలలో విద్యార్థి సంఘాల మధ్య, భావజాలాల మధ్య అభిప్రాయ భేదాలు ఉండడం సహజం. కాని కొంత కాలం నుంచి విద్యార్థి సంఘాల పేరిట జరుగుతున్న విపరీత పరిణామాలు ఆందోళన కలిగిస్తున్నాయి.

కులాల పేరుతో, మతాల పేరుతో విచ్ఛిన్నకర రాజకీయాలు జరుగుతున్నాయి. ఇలాంటి రాజకీయాలు చేస్తున్న వ్యక్తులు, సంఘాలు కులాల ముసుగు తగిలించుకొని రాజ్యాంగ నిర్మాత బాబాసాహెబ్‌ అంబేద్కర్‌ పేరు పెట్టుకొని ఆయా కులాలకు చెందిన గొప్ప వ్యక్తులను కించపరిచే విధంగా వ్యవహరిస్తున్నారు. కుల రహిత, సమసమాజ నిర్మాణం కోసం కలలు గని, దళిత, బలహీన వర్గాల అభ్యున్నతి కోసం రిజర్వేషన్‌ వ్యవస్థను తీసుకొచ్చి అంబేద్కర్‌ దేశ ప్రజలందరికి ఆరాధ్యుడయ్యాడు. అలాంటి మహనీయులు ఎప్పుడూ కూడా ఇలాంటి రాజకీయాలను దరిచేరనీయలేదు. కులం పునాదులపై ఒక నీతిని గాని, ఒక జాతిని గాని నిర్మించలేమని అంబేద్కర్‌ చెప్పాడు. మరి ఇప్పుడు మహనీయుల పేర్లతో సంఘాలుగా ఏర్పడి ముంబై పేలుళ్లు జరిపి, అమాయక ప్రజల ప్రాణాలు బలిగొన్న యాకూబ్‌ మెమన్‌ లాంటి తీవ్రవాదికి అనుకూలంగా మాట్లాడడం సమర్థనీయమా!

ముంబైలో పేలుళ్లు జరిపి నిండు ప్రాణాలు బలిగొన్న కేసులో నిందితుడు యాకూబ్‌ మెమన్‌ను దోషిగా నిర్ధారించి భారత అత్యున్నత న్యాయస్థానం ఉరిశిక్ష ఖరారు చేసింది. ఆ శిక్షను కోర్టులు అమలు చేయడం, దేశ ప్రజలు హర్షించడం జరిగిపోయాయి. కాని సెంట్రల్‌ యూనివర్సిటీలో మాత్రం యాకూబ్‌ మెనన్‌ ఉరి శిక్షను వ్యతిరేకిస్తూ ర్యాలీలు తీయడం జరిగింది. ముంబైపై చేసిన దాడులు సమర్థించే విధంగా యాకూబ్‌ మెమన్‌ ఆత్మ శాంతి కోరుతూ ‘‘నమాజ్‌-ఎ-జనాజ’’ పేరుతో అంబేద్కర్‌ స్టూడెంట్స్‌ అసోసియేషన్‌ నార్త్‌ క్యాంప్‌సలో బ్యానర్‌తో ప్రదర్శనలు నిర్వహించారు. ఆ సందర్భంగా ‘‘ఒక్క యాకూబ్‌ మెమన్‌ను చంపేస్తే ఇంటికొక యాకూబ్‌ మెమన్‌ పుట్టుకొస్తాడు’’ అంటూ చేసిన ప్రదర్శనలు వివాదానికి మూల కారణం.

ఏబీవీపీ విద్యార్థులు ఆ వ్యాఖ్యలను ఖండిస్తూ ఫేస్‌బుక్‌లో పోస్ట్‌ చేయడం జరిగింది. ఇది చూసిన ఏఎ్‌సఏ నాయకులు సుశీల్‌ కుమార్‌ అనే ఏబీవీపీ నాయకుని రూమ్‌కు వెళ్ళి చితకబాది తప్పైందంటూ క్షమాపణ ఉత్తరం రాయాలని భయపెట్టి క్షమాపణ ఉత్తరం రాయించుకోవడం జరిగింది. తీవ్ర గాయాలపాలైన సుశీల్‌ కుమార్‌ను మదీనగూడలోని అర్చన హాస్పిటల్‌కు తీసుకెళ్ళగా పేగులు, కిడ్నీలకు తీవ్ర గాయాలైనట్లు డాక్టర్లు నిర్ధారించారు. ఆ రోజు దాడిలో మరణానికి చేరువైన సుశీల్‌ పది రోజుల తరువాత చావు నుంచి బయటపడ్డాడు. నిజానిజాలను తెలుసుకునేందుకు అధ్యాపకులతో ఏర్పడిన కమిటీ ఏఎ్‌సఏ విద్యార్థుల దాడులను తప్పుపడుతూ ఒక సెమిస్టర్‌ పాటు సస్పెన్షన్‌ విధించింది. సస్పెన్షన్‌కు గురి అయిన విద్యార్థులు ఆందోళన బాట పట్టగా యూనివర్సిటీ యాజమాన్యం సస్పెన్షన్‌ సడలించి తరగతుల హాజరుకు అనుమతించింది. హాస్టల్‌కు, ఎన్నికలకు దూరంగా వుండాలని షరతు విధించింది. గత 15 ఏళ్ళలో హెచ్‌సీయూలో దాదాపు 30 మందికి పైగా విద్యార్థుల్ని సస్పెండ్‌ చేయడం జరిగింది. పరిపాలనా కార్యకలాపాల్లో భాగంగా ఇటువంటి క్రమశిక్షణ చర్యల తీసుకోవడం సాధారణమైన అంశమే. అయినప్పటికీ సస్పెండ్‌ అయిన విద్యార్థులు హైకోర్టును ఆశ్రయించగా ఈ నెల 18న వాదనలు వినాల్సి వుంది.

అందుకు ఒక రోజు ముందే దురదృష్టవశాత్తు (17వ తేదీన) రోహిత్‌ ఆత్మహత్య చేసుకున్నాడు. మొత్తం ఈ ఘటనల నేపథ్యంలో ఏఎ్‌సఏ నాయకులు, రోహిత్‌ మధ్య పలుసార్లు బేధాభిప్రాయాలు నెలకొన్నాయి. రోహిత్‌ది సైద్ధాంతికంగా ఉన్నత భావాలు గల వ్యక్తిత్వం. ఈ సంఘటన క్యాంప్‌సకే పరిమితం కావాలని, చర్చల ద్వారా పరిష్కరించుకుందామని తన మిత్రులకు సూచించాడు. తానే స్వయంగా ఏబీవీపీ నాయకుడు సుశీల్‌ కుమార్‌కు ఇదే విషయాన్ని ప్రతిపాదించాడు కూడా. ఇది నచ్చని ఏఎ్‌సఏ నాయకులు దీన్ని ఒక రాజకీయ అంశంగా, జాతీయస్థాయికి తీసుకెళ్ళాలని కులవాదంతో దీన్ని కొనసాగించాలని తీసుకున్న నిర్ణయాన్ని కూడా రోహిత్‌ వ్యతిరేకించాడు. ఈ అంశాలు రోహిత్‌ సూసైడ్‌ నోట్‌ను విశ్లేషిస్తే అవగతమౌతుంది. ‘‘నా శరీరానికి మనసుకు మధ్య దూరం రోజు రోజుకు పెరుగుతుంది’’ అన్న రోహిత్‌ మాటలు మానసికంగా తాను ఈ పరిణామాల పట్ల పడుతున్న సంఘర్షణను తేటతెల్లం చేస్తాయి. అంతేకాక ‘‘నా చావుకు ఎవ్వరూ కారణం కాదు, నా శత్రువులు కూడా కారణం కాదు’’ అంటూ రాసాడు. ‘‘నా శవయాత్ర చాలా నిశ్శబ్దంగా జరగాలి’’ అన్న రోహిత్‌ మాటలు అతడు ఏం కోరుకుంటున్నాడో స్పష్టం చేస్తున్నాయి.

జరిగిన సంఘటనలు ఇలా ఉంటే, ఏబీవీపీ నాయకుడు సుశీల్‌ కుమార్‌పై దాడి జరిగినప్పుడు ఎమ్మెల్సీ రామ్‌చందర్‌ రావు పరామర్శించి, యూనివర్సిటీ ఇంచార్జ్‌ వీసీ శర్మను కలిసి వివరాలు తెలుసుకోవడం జరిగింది. కమిటి వేసామని, ఆ కమిటీ నివేదిక ప్రకారం నడుచుకుంటామని అప్పటి వీసీ చెప్పడం జరిగింది. తరువాత కొంతమంది విద్యార్థులు కేంద్ర మంత్రి దత్తాత్రేయను కలిసి యూనివర్సిటీ ఘటనల గురించి వినతి పత్రం అందించగా ఆ వినతి పత్రాన్ని యధావిధిగా ఆగస్టు 17న హెచ్‌.ఆర్‌.డి. మంత్రిత్వ శాఖకు పంపించడం జరిగింది. తిరిగి దత్తాత్రేయ రాసిన ఉత్తరానికి ప్రత్యుత్తరం డిసెంబర్‌ 27, 2015న హెచ్‌సీయూకు చేరింది. అప్పటికే అంటే సెప్టెంబర్‌ 8, 2015న విద్యార్థులపై క్రమశిక్షణా చర్యల్లో భాగంగా సస్పెండ్‌ చేయడం జరిగింది. దత్తాత్రేయ ఉత్తరంలో ఎక్కడా కూడా ఏ విద్యార్థి పేరుగాని, తీసుకోవలసిన చర్యలుగాని పేర్కొనలేదు. దత్తాత్రేయను ఎందుకు ఈ వివాదంలోకి లాగుతున్నారో ఇప్పటికీ అర్థంకాని విషయం. ఈ విషయం జరుగుతున్న క్రమంలో ఎమ్మెల్సీ రామ్‌చందర్‌రావుతో మందక్రిష్ణ మాదిగ, జస్టిస్‌ బి.చంద్రకుమార్‌, మాల మహానాడు తెలంగాణ అధ్యక్షులు మాట్లాడి సమస్య పరిష్కారం దిశగా ప్రయత్నించడం జరిగింది. గతంలో ఎనిమిది మంది దళిత విద్యార్థులు ఆత్మహత్య చేసుకున్నప్పుడు మాట కూడా మాట్లాడని రాహుల్‌ గాంధీ, నేడు ఏకంగా హెచ్‌సీయూకి వచ్చి దీనినో జాతీయ రాజకీయ వివాదంగా మార్చడం వెనుక రాజకీయ కుట్ర వుంది. కాంగ్రెస్‌ పార్టీ నాయకుడు, మాజీ ఎంపీ అయిన సిరిసిల్ల రాజయ్య కోడలు సారిక తన పిల్లలతో సహా ఆత్మహత్య చేసుకుంటే ఈ రోజువరకు కూడా పరామర్శించని కాంగ్రెస్‌ పార్టీ, రాహుల్‌ గాంధీలది అవకాశవాద రాజకీయం కాదా! టీఆర్‌ఎస్‌ పార్టీ నాయకురాలు కవిత హైదరాబాదులోనే వున్నా కూడా హెచ్‌సీయూలో ఎనిమిది మంది దళిత విద్యార్థులు ఆత్మహత్య చేసుకున్నప్పుడు స్పందించలేదు.

జీహెచ్‌ఎంసీ ఎన్నికల్లో ఓట్ల కోసమే ఈ శవరాజకీయాలు చేస్తున్నారనడంలో ఎలాంటి సందేహం లేదు. మొన్నటివరకు అసహనం పేరుతో రాజకీయ పబ్బం గడిపిన కమ్యూనిస్టు మేధావులకు హెచ్‌సీయూ వివాదంతో మళ్ళీ పని దొరికింది. కులం ముసుగులో ఏం చేసినా చెల్లుతుందనే ధోరణి ఏ దళిత వాదానికి నిదర్శనం? పథకం ప్రకారం తన మరణంతో పబ్బం గడుపుకుంటున్న రాజకీయ నాయకులను చూసి రోహిత్‌ ఆత్మ మరింత క్షోభిస్తుంది. వీళ్ళ చేస్తున్న రాజకీయాలు రోహిత్‌ మరణ వాంగ్మూలానికి విరుద్ధం. రోహిత వెనుకబడిన వర్గానికి చెందిన విద్యార్థి అయినప్పటికీ అతని మరణం తరువాత కూడా దళితుడంటూ ప్రచారం చేయడం గమనించాల్సిన విషయం. దేశ భద్రతకు సవాలుగా మారుతున్న ఉగ్రవాదానికి ఊతమిచ్చే చర్యల్ని ఖండించాల్సిన రాజకీయ పార్టీలు, రాజకీయ అవకాశవాదానికి దిగడం ప్రమాదకరం. ఇలాంటి కార్యకలాపాలకు యూనివర్సిటీలు వేదికలు కావడం మరింత ప్రమాదకరం. రోహిత్‌ తన మరణంతో ఈ అస్తిత్వవాదానికి తెర లేపాడు. తను మరణించి ఈ దుశ్చర్యలను ప్రపంచానికి తెలియజెప్పాడు. భావజాలాలకు, రాజకీయ అవకాశవాదాలకు మధ్య వున్న సున్నితమైన సరిహద్దుల్ని విద్యార్థి మేధావులు గుర్తెరగాల్సిన అవసరాన్ని తన మరణ శాసనంతో లిఖించాడు రోహిత్‌. రోహిత్‌ తల్లిదండ్రుల్ని ఓదార్చి ఆదుకోవాల్సిన సమయంలో శవ రాజకీయాలు చేయడం, వారిని మరింత బాధపెట్టడమే అవుతుంది.

దొంతగాని వీరబాబు 

రీసెర్చ్స్కాలర్‌, ఉస్మానియా యూనివర్సిటీ