Re: [Goanet] LETTER WRITTEN TODAY BY PROF PETER RONALD DE SOUZA TO THE ADVOCATE GENERAL OF GOA ATMARAM NADKARNI

[Floriano Lobo]

Floriano Lobo  Dear Prof. Peter
Ronald De Souza, Sir, I normally skip this type of involvement into
controversies where frustrated persons want to take on the popular
government, a government that lives for the welfare of the people, go beg
and borrow to make them most comfortable. I have never considered you as a
frustrated person but a person who has his head squarely on his shoulders
and therefore, I ventured to read all that you have written. And, sorry to
say, I wish I had not read it after all because I am now convinced that you
are really a frustrated man. You are questioning Goa's God Almighty of Law
and Constitution matters? How dare you? This is not the first Ordinance
that he has passed through his fingers. Remember the IFFI [Town and Country
Planning] Ordinance? Any body had the guts to challenge that one? Besides,
our Advocate General is the King MOMO of the present dispensation. He says,
'go ahead and do it' and it is done. Keeping your frustrations aside, you
must realise that Goans have given this Government a simple majority to do
what it likes with their lives. Commandere large tracks of eco sensitive
areas and hand them over to their benefectors. Example is Tiracol, Carmona
and more importantly MOPA. They have even murdered the most vociferous of
opponents of MOPA by taking him in and then giving his a 21 gun salute,
thereby grooming his widow to be a lifelong chamcha. Frustrated people like
yourself have been trying to revert back these decisions but sadly they are
powerless in front of this giant. They own a pliant Governor. They own a
determined Prime Minister. They even have a Defence Minister who is ready
to put his arms around them and egg them on, any time, any day, as if the
flights from Delhi to Goa and vice versa are batata wadas. Who do you have?
the Courts? Forget it if you think the Courts will come to the rescue of
frustrated people and the Constitution which is limping. They want to turn
Goa University into a RSS shaka. Already Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, the RSS
ideologue has been installed on the grounds of Goa University. The next
thing that will happen is that VC Shetye, in his new avatar ,will be
marching with a kala topic, khaki chaddi and a danda to dare you to stand
up and be counted. The best that you and your friend Aires can do is to
drown your sorrows over a shot of Caju Feni and start living again. Better
still, chanting 'Parsekar Zindabad'. GSRP

On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 7:50 PM, Aires Rodrigues 
wrote:

> Dated: 24th October 2015
>
>
> Honourable Advocate General Atmaram Nadkarni,
>
>
> I write to seek your clarification on the issues of law that have a bearing
> on the continuation in office of the Vice Chancellor of Goa University, Dr
> Satish Shetye, after 25 October 2015. I do this because the authority of
> your august office has been invoked to legitimize the decision to amend the
> statutes regarding superannuation and to give the proposed amendment the
> authority of the law. There are fundamental issues involved here, both
> jurisprudential and procedural, concerning the rule of law in a
> Constitutional democracy, which your august office is tasked with both
> upholding and promoting.
>
>
> I write this because I see the Advocate General as primarily carrying two
> moral obligations:
>
>
> To advise the government about the principles and the letter of law when it
> takes any policy decisions. This advice ensures that the decisions are
> consistent with the law as it stands and with the norms of the
> constitutional order.
>
>
> To educate the citizens of Goa on the value of the rule of law and of the
> importance of all persons, irrespective of office, to be rule abiding which
> is a core feature of any democracy.
>
>
> These obligations, which you have willingly undertaken when you took the
> oath of office, gives your office an autonomy from the government although
> you have been appointed by it. This is a very privileged position and
> carries a very heavy responsibility. In short, even though you are of the
> government you are for the Constitution of India and would reprimand the
> government when it strays from the constitutional path.
>
>
> Now let me turn to the processes and procedures followed by the Goa
> University authorities to enable Dr Shetye to continue in office after he
> reaches/reached the age of 65 years. I will limit myself to issues that
> pertain to your office and I will stay within the narrow confines of the
> law and not get into the politics of the matter.
>
>
> In March the Goa University EC decided to request the Chancellor to extend
> the term of the VC beyond the contracted period which requires him to
> retire after he reaches the age of superannuation, i.e., 65 years.
>
>
> A draft letter making a request for extension, which was to be sent to the
> Chancellor, was circulated in advance to members. This letter was objected
> to by me in my letter 

[Goanet] LETTER WRITTEN TODAY BY PROF PETER RONALD DE SOUZA TO THE ADVOCATE GENERAL OF GOA ATMARAM NADKARNI

[Aires Rodrigues]

Dated: 24th October 2015


Honourable Advocate General Atmaram Nadkarni,


I write to seek your clarification on the issues of law that have a bearing
on the continuation in office of the Vice Chancellor of Goa University, Dr
Satish Shetye, after 25 October 2015. I do this because the authority of
your august office has been invoked to legitimize the decision to amend the
statutes regarding superannuation and to give the proposed amendment the
authority of the law. There are fundamental issues involved here, both
jurisprudential and procedural, concerning the rule of law in a
Constitutional democracy, which your august office is tasked with both
upholding and promoting.


I write this because I see the Advocate General as primarily carrying two
moral obligations:


To advise the government about the principles and the letter of law when it
takes any policy decisions. This advice ensures that the decisions are
consistent with the law as it stands and with the norms of the
constitutional order.


To educate the citizens of Goa on the value of the rule of law and of the
importance of all persons, irrespective of office, to be rule abiding which
is a core feature of any democracy.


These obligations, which you have willingly undertaken when you took the
oath of office, gives your office an autonomy from the government although
you have been appointed by it. This is a very privileged position and
carries a very heavy responsibility. In short, even though you are of the
government you are for the Constitution of India and would reprimand the
government when it strays from the constitutional path.


Now let me turn to the processes and procedures followed by the Goa
University authorities to enable Dr Shetye to continue in office after he
reaches/reached the age of 65 years. I will limit myself to issues that
pertain to your office and I will stay within the narrow confines of the
law and not get into the politics of the matter.


In March the Goa University EC decided to request the Chancellor to extend
the term of the VC beyond the contracted period which requires him to
retire after he reaches the age of superannuation, i.e., 65 years.


A draft letter making a request for extension, which was to be sent to the
Chancellor, was circulated in advance to members. This letter was objected
to by me in my letter dated and sent to all the members on 11 March 2015, I
stated my objections since I believed it was bad in law and harmful to the
institution. Goa University as an institution must be committed to a
principle of routine and rule bound succession, a valuable principle which,
I believed, was being undermined. As a result of this objection the
initiative was withdrawn and a letter was instead sent to the Government of
Goa seeking clarification on whether the VC Dr Shetye can be given an
extension.


For several months no reply was received from Government and the routine
Executive Council meeting of 30 September 2015 was informed that the
University was still awaiting a reply from government. The EC was also
informed that the present Registrar who had reached the age of
superannuation could continue in office as per the rules. Is this a correct
reading of the law?


On 10th October a Special Meeting of the EC was called for the 15th to
endorse a change in the statute enabling the VC get a full 5 year term
beyond the age of superannuation.  The proposed amendment to the Statutes
of Goa University recommended (i) the appointment of a VC irrespective of
age at entry, (ii) the appointee be given a full term of 5 years, and (iii)
the retirement age being extended to 70 years from the present 65 years.
The EC was informed, in a letter from the Director of Higher Education,
that the matter had been examined by the government and studied by your
learned self. In short you had approved the process that was now to follow.
In your learned eyes the process that was being adopted was consistent with
the law.


The Director of Education in his letter DHE/Accts/Forum Non
govt/3-28/2015-16/2818 dt 9/10/2015 on the issue of age enhancement has
stated: ‘..issue raised by the Vice Chancellor of Goa University was
examined by the Government. Further, Legal opinion from Ld Advocate General
was also obtained. After careful examination of both proposals it has been
decided by the government to request the University to amend the Statute
SA-6 immediately providing that the Vice Chancellor shall hold office for a
term of five years from the date of which he enters office irrespective of
his/her age’.


This was repeated in the papers presented to the EC on 15th October 2015.


Your scrutiny and approval was assuring for us. As a citizen of Goa we
wanted the guarantee that your High Constitutional Office had examined the
matter and advised both the Government and Goa University that the actions
to amend the Statutes were aligned with the principles of law.


Since your first obligation was to alert the government on staying within
the