It is our painful duty to submit this tale of woe for the matter bleeds our heart. The Institute has always remained a second home for all the faculty members and thousands of students. Institute of English has always remained an ideal and the best Institute in the University. This hallmark can be achieved through dedicated team work and by the grace of Almighty Allah we have the best team in the University. Team is always led by a dedicated team leader. His role is crucial. If team leader fails in his responsibilities the entire team gets disturbed, unfortunately the existing Director of Institute of English neither believes in team, nor in team work. His role is authoritarian and based on inclination towards dictatorship. He has lot of things in personal with everyone in the faculty. He keeps his grudge against every faculty member and at times he proves himself vindictive. However; in today’s session, we’ll discuss his personal grudges later; let us first check his academic and administrative performance.
As a Head of the Institute, he has hardly called three to four official meetings in his entire tenure i.e. three years. Unfortunately in every meeting he has insulted the faculty members. This indicates his non-belief in democratic, professional and team work style of leadership.
As a Head of the Institute, he often deliberately or owing to other reasons hides official information and never shares it. At the eleventh hour in case of emergency, he simply circulates the paper in Muster roll. (The recent case is with the letter of the Dean, which was kept in his draws for 10 days and he circulated it on 20th November 2020, which was the last date of submission). He even failed to share information regarding today’s letter which was clearly written in this letter). He never circulated the minutes of meetings issued by the register regarding Vice Chancellors meeting with HoDs. He never circulated the letter of I.T Manager in which, the I.T Manager had warned the teachers against the collapse of LMS and had asked the faculty members to save files from LMS. To sum up, in his entire tenure all official correspondence and important information has been kept away from the access of faculty members or shared at eleventh hour where the essence of information is lost.
In last three years, he never took any effort to re-start M.Phil program, though the things were quite favourable. What he did with M.Phil scholars, how he kept the results lingering, how he failed students on personal vindication and how he could award 0 marks in M.Phil paper are other questions to ponder over. In short owing to his whimsical policies our scholars adversely suffer.
In all Universities of Pakistan, New curriculum and Syllabus of English approved by Higher Education Commission in 2017 runs, but here at Shah Abdul Latif University, Khairpur, we are still stuck with old 2012 Syllabus. It indicates that our team leader is least interested in such developments.
He has failed to devise clear policy regarding evening students. Students of BS-IV (Evening) were placed together with students of Morning, but what about the rest of the evening classes???? Now you will say that it is to be generalized that rest of the classes will go with the same scheme. No Sir, in evening program, he had insulted a teacher for taking class. He had told him that how he could take class without his permission.
The most unfortunate thing on his part as a director is involvement of students in politics. He pressurizes certain students to be his agents and takes reports of individual teachers. This was started in his first year of tenure and it still goes on. He belittles teachers’ worth in front of students by uttering sentences “Who is he/she? Why are you following him/her?”. He insulted some teachers while interrupting in their classes. The fuss on Camera in class is an evident of that thing. He could have waited till the class ended but he never considers the dignity of teachers.
Before him, the Institute was popular in entire University as the centre of co-curricular activities celebrating cultural days. Our students participated in debates, sports and other activities. But for him it is simple wastage of time. Unfortunately, for students of literature this is medium of learning which he has altogether banned in the Institute terming it as the wastage of time.
He has nurtured hatred against students and faculty of literature.
Over all, his attitude with the faculty members is not encouraging. He often tilts to threats, vindication and creation of chaos in the faculty. Resultantly we lost one of our colleagues. She was an excellent addition in the faculty of linguistics, but she got disappointed and quit.
Some faculty members were allowed by ASRB to supervise M.Phl/MS students in the Institute. He denied the right of supervision to the faculty members of literature on the pretext that they could not supervise students of linguistics. On the contrary he himself supervises the students of both literature and linguistics. Thus he even fails to comply the orders of August houses.
It is famous tale about him that he delays, denies and fails to deliver the results of the students. The authorities know this episode very well so we don’t need to repeat it.
Moreover, he speaks against the faculty members even in the presence of the Vice Chancellor.
Now let’s see, the achievements of this man as the Director. His two great achievements as the Director are:
Installation of Cameras
Installation of Multimedia. Both are praiseworthy actions, but both created problems for faculty members especially to those of literature.
The Camera in library cum class created confusion. If any one teacher is to be monitored, it is ethically incorrect. If teachers are to be monitored through Camera, it must be common criteria for all.
The installation of Multimedia is useless for teachers of literature. for one of the teachers teaching literature was insulted on use of multimedia. She was told that teachers of literature can’t use it. Now when both of the items proved to be installed for vested interests. Our question arises?
What was the source of these installations?
Why the money meant for improvements of Seminar library was spent on other heads?
If it was mandatory, then was the purchase made through Purchase Committee or single handedly? His other achievement was Selection Board. In this Selection Board he again created rift and chaos. He declared two faculty members “Not eligible”. Thus he rooted and watered permanent evil in the Institute while putting faculty members against each other.
Now personal things for him. According to him, Saeen Zafar Ali Shah is Blackmailer Saeen Mukesh Kumar is Work shy Madam Rubina is a liar Hassan Shaikh is most unpleasant person Ibrahim Khokhar is Hypocrite Madam Paras is Incompetent Dr. Ghulam Mustafa Mashori plays politics As if, only he is the honest, dedicated, learned, qualified and competent person running this Institute. To sum up the administrative role of the incumbent director is very discouraging. Resultantly both the students and the faculty adversely suffer. His attitude is authoritarian, dictatorial and sometimes tantamount to misbehavior. In this write up we have ignored the cases of individual problems of teachers and have mainly focused on those issues which are detrimental to the overall performance of the Institute. Submitted by the faculty members of Institute of English, before the Dean faculty of Arts & Languages on Monday, 28 December 2020 in faculty meeting.
mikesalu 