Monday, December 05, 2005
The great question of the hour to the whole nation: Is Indian Science free of politics?
NDA proposed NIS at Allahabad, Bhubaneswar, Pune and Chennai when there was no report like ‘Indian Science Report’ which analysed “State-wise regional imbalance of national educational institute in India”. So the question why Allahabad and Pune were considered does not matter a lot at that point of time.
However, after reading and admiring that “State-wise regional imbalance of national educational institute in India” from ‘Indian Science Report’ prepared by INSA;
Why did UPA government announce ‘Indian Institute of Science for Education and Research (IISER)’ at Pune and Kolkata in the same day without considering the ‘Indian Science Report’ even though the prime minister read the report before releasing the report and announcing IISER at Pune and Kolkata?
The nation could wait two more years after initial proposal of ‘National Institute of Science’ to announce modified version of it as IISER, the nation could definitely wait another couple of months to take this vital decision?
If the institutes were already proposed, then the prime minister and the government could wait little more time, at most it could take two more months, to finalize the location after considering state wise regional imbalance of national education institute as mentioned in Indian Science Report!
Was the announcement in hurry for the government?
Was not it political to fulfill the desire of certain supporting political parties, so that delay could spoil the decision like the earlier proposal of National Institute of Science?
Isn’t the state wise regional imbalance while locating national educational institute in India politically driven rather just a scientific policy and affair by scientific decision makers?
Are the scientific decision/policy makers neutral and politically not driven?
If the scientific decision and policy makers could have taken this decision on their own, then they must have considered the ‘Indian Science Report’ by INSA before announcing IISER at Kolkata and Pune.
If ‘Indian Science Report’ is not considered by scientific policy makers, then it would have been like playing double standard while making scientific decision without going to scientific record and national need?
In fact, even if they did not consider ‘Indian Science report’ then also “National Institute of Science (NIS)” and “Indian Institute of Science for Education and Research” would have been the same institute and already proposed locations for NIS would not have been overlooked.
Indeed, the central government would not have denied in their affidavit filed in Cuttack High court that there was no proposal for national institute in Bhubaneswar.
If there was no ill concern, then why Kolkata and Pune were selected over Chennai, Delhi, Hyderabad, Bangalore, Bhubaneswar, Chandigarh, Kochi, Lucknow, Indore, Ahemadabad?
Do these cities have any deficiencies for hosting a national science institute and/or growing science? Many of them host many center of excellence in education and research.
Renaming NIS to IISER and changing the location deepens the following doubts further:
Indian scientific policy makers and their decision are not independent from the Indian politics and political cloud.
This bring another big and great question,
Are Indian Science and scientific policy free from Indian politics as claimed by our honorable leaders and prime minister?
Is Indian Science above politics and safe for future?
However, after reading and admiring that “State-wise regional imbalance of national educational institute in India” from ‘Indian Science Report’ prepared by INSA;
Why did UPA government announce ‘Indian Institute of Science for Education and Research (IISER)’ at Pune and Kolkata in the same day without considering the ‘Indian Science Report’ even though the prime minister read the report before releasing the report and announcing IISER at Pune and Kolkata?
The nation could wait two more years after initial proposal of ‘National Institute of Science’ to announce modified version of it as IISER, the nation could definitely wait another couple of months to take this vital decision?
If the institutes were already proposed, then the prime minister and the government could wait little more time, at most it could take two more months, to finalize the location after considering state wise regional imbalance of national education institute as mentioned in Indian Science Report!
Was the announcement in hurry for the government?
Was not it political to fulfill the desire of certain supporting political parties, so that delay could spoil the decision like the earlier proposal of National Institute of Science?
Isn’t the state wise regional imbalance while locating national educational institute in India politically driven rather just a scientific policy and affair by scientific decision makers?
Are the scientific decision/policy makers neutral and politically not driven?
If the scientific decision and policy makers could have taken this decision on their own, then they must have considered the ‘Indian Science Report’ by INSA before announcing IISER at Kolkata and Pune.
If ‘Indian Science Report’ is not considered by scientific policy makers, then it would have been like playing double standard while making scientific decision without going to scientific record and national need?
In fact, even if they did not consider ‘Indian Science report’ then also “National Institute of Science (NIS)” and “Indian Institute of Science for Education and Research” would have been the same institute and already proposed locations for NIS would not have been overlooked.
Indeed, the central government would not have denied in their affidavit filed in Cuttack High court that there was no proposal for national institute in Bhubaneswar.
If there was no ill concern, then why Kolkata and Pune were selected over Chennai, Delhi, Hyderabad, Bangalore, Bhubaneswar, Chandigarh, Kochi, Lucknow, Indore, Ahemadabad?
Do these cities have any deficiencies for hosting a national science institute and/or growing science? Many of them host many center of excellence in education and research.
Renaming NIS to IISER and changing the location deepens the following doubts further:
Indian scientific policy makers and their decision are not independent from the Indian politics and political cloud.
This bring another big and great question,
Are Indian Science and scientific policy free from Indian politics as claimed by our honorable leaders and prime minister?
Is Indian Science above politics and safe for future?
# posted by Digambara Patra @ 4:16 AM 
