An Interview with Dr. Arjun Karki

Dr Arjun Karki began his career of health care and innovation as a health worker in the hills of rural Nepal. After graduating from Tribhuvan University Institute of Medicine, Karki went on to study in the United States where he acquired Board Certification in Internal Medicine, Pulmonary Disease and Critical Care. Since returning to Kathmandu he has worked tirelessly with his colleagues to enhance the status of both clinical practice and medical education in Nepal. 

After leading the establishment of an innovative school at Kathmandu University, Karki is now working with national and international colleagues to establish Patan University of Health Sciences (PUHS). On the cusp of being formally recognized by their national parliament, PUHS is devoted to addressing the remarkable health disparities affecting the portions of the population outside the Kathmandu Valley. Karki is currently Chief of the Department of Medicine at Patan Hospital.

TBB: For those of us who have never been there, could you describe Nepal, could you set the scene in terms of the environment, the social and political landscape?

AK: It’s a country of mountains, as you know, the country of Mount Everest. Beautiful nature –that’s what attracts a lot of tourists and once they are there most of the people want to go again and again. The people are extremely nice, mostly farmer population –hospitable, very friendly. At the same time there is also tremendous poverty. Until recently the country was in a mess of a bloody civil war; with the recent peace accord the likelihood of similar violent political conflict erupting has lessened so it’s peaceful. 

TBB: You say there’s a lot of poverty –is there an image that stands out in your mind of how that poverty looks?

AK: First of all when we say poverty what are we saying? When a person does not have an income above a dollar a day then we define this person as being below the poverty line. When I say “poor” this is what I’m talking about. Over half the population in Nepal do not have an income that is equal to a dollar a day. The average national expenditure on health per person per annum is somewhere between 10 and 11 dollars. 

Because we do not have insurance and the public subsidy is low what happens is about 70 percent of the costs have to be borne by the individual patient or his/her family. So imagine people getting sick and not having any means to get medical care. Or they can’t go to work so they don’t have money for food when they need it most —they don’t have resources available to feed themselves, to feed their kids, to feed their families. So the suffering that accompanies having so little –the mental suffering, the physical suffering– this is what I’m talking about when I say “poor.”

TBB: Could you tell the readers a bit about the similarities and differences between the medical systems that you find here in Canada and the United States and the one in Nepal?

AK: One of the commonalities would be the scientific aspect of it: when you have a patient come to you the protocol that you follow –the evaluation and treatment– would be similar. Other than that there is a big, big, contrast between the medical systems of North America and that of Nepal. First, we do not have any insurance system and therefore everything in terms of the treatment has to come out of pocket. The second thing is the misery of the general populace: there are poor even in urban areas where most of the health care system operates. Thirdly, there’s the large misery in the rural areas where health care hardly exists. It is not only a question of affordability (which is absolutely the case for rural people) but accessibility. In Canada and the US people talk about the shortage of doctors and medical personnel in rural areas but the situations cannot be compared.

TBB: What are the consequences?

AK: People are dying premature deaths from diseases that are easily preventable or easily treatable. A lot of children die prematurely and a lot of women die during pregnancy or delivery due to the lack of adequate care. Women end up with complications that would be easily treatable had they had the access to a proper medical facility, but because there is none the women may end up dying. 

And to go into more detail: more and more people in Nepal now have access to TV, telephone, and newspapers.We leave and bring back the message of what is happening around the world. As a result, people have the opportunity to see the disparity between what they are supposed to have, what is possible and what they actually have. This is one of the reasons for the political agitation we’ve had. The rebels mobilized the masses, resulting in a bloody civil war that has killed nearly 15,000 people and has left many hundreds of thousands displaced. This is the indirect effect of this disparity between urban and rural health. Unless we properly address the legitimate interests, the legitimate concerns, of the populace then it’s going to lead to another bout of violence. 

TBB: The project that you’re working on with Dr. Woollard, our Department Head can you describe a bit about that?

AK: Basically what we’re saying is that given how the health situation is related to the other factors in our social life —poverty, social discrimination, political violence, etc— when you talk about improving the health of the rural population you cannot see this in isolation. It has to be seen in the broader sociopolitical context. 

Secondly, the current models of medical education have not been able to produce doctors who are willing to serve the deprived communities, especially in the context of going out and being in the rural areas. This is in part what has led to the situation that I spoke of earlier. If we really want to address this disparity, if we really want to make the health care system functional, if we really want to prevent premature death and suffering, then we have to get the people who are not only competent but are also caring, enthusiastic, and are motivated to go and serve in the rural areas. 

The current model of medical education does not orient the students in this direction; we cannot expect anything out of the current medical education system. To get a different result we have to take a different path. What we’re talking about is creating a medical school, a new health science university with the principle of what Bob [Woollard] would like to call “socially accountable” —all of society has invested in and has so much trust in the doctors and in the health care system. If this is the case then we’d better try to do something that responds to all needs in society, especially those who are vulnerable, especially those who are voiceless. 

TBB: What’s the school going to look like in practical terms? What is the vision?

AK: Basically we would like to dedicate ourselves to creating an environment in which the health status of the people of Nepal would be improved in a sustained way. Obviously, as I said earlier, we have to incorporate our programs in terms of education, service, research and collaboration with the other stakeholders; but in order to do that we first of all have to have an autonomous institution. It’s what we’re calling the Patan University of Health Sciences. Obviously the scope and mandate of the university is going to be large. We would probably start with the training of the doctors and we envision a class size of about 50 per annum. It will be a course of five to six years. 

There is also the concept of participatory development –how can we engage and work together with those who are supposed to be the beneficiaries of the work being done. We tend to knowingly or unknowingly use top-down approaches and that in part is what makes universities alienated from the real needs of the society, the real needs of the population. If we do not take into consideration the perspective of those who we profess to serve, then there’s a greater risk of ourselves being alienated from the masses, from society. That is why we need to engage in a dialogue in a proactive way, and provide the opportunities for them to voice their concerns, to define the agenda together to whatever extent is possible. If we can bring them [the rural population] into a dialogue then we think we will help the cause even further: both from the perspective of sustainability in terms of the impact and of the cost effective use of the resources.

TBB: The question of participatory development –how is it integrated into the work being done in Nepal?

AK: Here’s an example: most of the medical schools, especially in our part of the world, when they develop this kind of program –let us say curriculum development– what ends up happening is that only the experts will sit in a room. They’ll make a big conference, and then decide, “okay, we need to do this, this, this, this” and, bingo, you have curriculum. What we’ve said is let’s hear what the people have to say. What is it that they would like to see? 

So we have involved people right from the inception. We’re also engaging with the communities in the rural areas, encouraging them to identify persons who they think would have the capability to study medicine and also have the commitment to serve in their respective communities. We do not want to take the burden on our own shoulders alone. We want to involve the communities because they know what is in their best interest.

Obviously another context would be training our graduates so they already know the on-ground realities –we’ll have students meet with the rural people to see and analyze the living conditions. What kind of food do they have? What is their income level? How do they manage their lives? Until and unless you expose your students to that reality then obviously you cannot presume that just by training them –by infusing them with the scientific concepts and certain skills –that they are automatically going to be socially responsible, socially accountable, doctors. 

TBB: Do you have some specific examples that you could share?

AK: If our aim is just to treat the patient who will come to our office then that is a relatively easy game. You wait in your hospital, let the patient come and visit you: then you treat those who come and ignore those who do not come. That’s probably easy. 

Whether it is accessible or not, that’s an entirely different story. As I said, health is determined not by the technical part of the medicine alone. Injections are necessary; operations are necessary; drugs are necessary –at times hospitalization and providing care in the hospital setting is important– but that alone and by itself is not going to improve health. Patients are grappling with issues such as food, security, income, water supply, and housing. 

TBB: What about these things, the water, the housing?

AK: People don’t have water. Some people have to walk three hours one-way to get water –you can imagine how much physical labour they have to endure to do that. And what is the amount of water they actually need to prepare food, to wash, to maintain body cleanliness, to clean the house, to use for the garden? And when you have the priority of drinking versus cleaning your toilet which one would you choose? 

So this is what I mean by poverty. So telling them, “Keep your toilets clean. Wash your hands with soap and water each time you visit your toilet.” This preaching alone is not going to do the trick. As physicians we have to explore how can we improve the water supply in this community? Who are the stakeholders who can contribute to improving the water supply in this area? Are there plumbers? Are there sanitary engineers in this area whose expertise we can tap? Your role as a doctor unless and until you are aware of this other dimension of health is limited. Whereas if you know, you would go and talk to the sanitary engineer, and negotiate with the government, or talk to the community leaders and say, “Hey guys, we have to improve the water sanitation in our community so that we do not suffer from the water-borne diseases.”

If people do not have income, if people don’t have economic opportunities, then it’s difficult for them to get food, to build houses, to build latrines, to install tap water in their homes even if the water sources are available. It’s not only financial resources it’s a matter of mindset again. This issue is not exactly under the jurisdiction of a traditional physician. A traditional physician is supposed to be involved with taking care of a sick patient when they fall sick and not go beyond this. 

If we really mean to improve the health of the people we have to go beyond that. For example, how can we motivate the children to go to school so that they learn and that knowledge comes into their families? Children can teach a lot of hygienic messages that are important –washing hands, letting the smoke go out of your home when you cook food otherwise you get some respiratory diseases. These may sound like small things, but when you are talking about a population of 24 million these small things can initiate a chain reaction –the way people think, the way people behave, and one thing can lead to another. 

If poverty is creating that degree of ill health, then it becomes mandatory for you as a doctor, as a person who is committed to improving the health of that population, to take the leadership, to take the initiative, to spearhead the cause to improve the health. In order to be able to come to this phase of enlightenment or understanding and to have the confidence to go out and reach out to people for help, we need doctors and nurses with a completely different mindset. 

TBB: When you consulted “the people” about curriculum development what did they say? 

AK: What they say for example is “we don’t like the way the doctor talks to us. The doctors think of themselves as gods and we are nobody. They refuse to give us time when we ask questions. Teach your future doctors to treat us as human beings.” These are the kinds of things they told us in the meeting. So obviously when your curriculum does not emphasize this concept of respect, the concept of good communication skills, listening skills –we are what we are because of the education that we have, the way we are brought up.

TBB: Are there any questions that I should have asked, but haven’t?

AK: You might like to ask how could UBC help?

TBB: Okay, how can UBC help?

AK: We would like to see three things from UBC. Number one is the fact that yours is an established institution with decades of experience. You have an institutional memory and institutional expertise –a system for doing things. This is one area we wish to learn and benefit from as we start building our own institution. 

Similarly we need some help in human resources development –when you build an institution you have a tremendous need for faculty. We would benefit immensely from people on sabbatical with the academic interest and vigor to do international medicine to come over and guide us –this would be a useful way to set up a department or a departmental system. 

Thirdly of course would be the research area. We neither have the resources nor the research culture. It is the culture part that I’m interested: we could collaborate in identifying, developing and pursuing some mutually beneficial, mutually interesting research agenda, so that during that very process relevant technical know-how would get transferred to us. It is the local institutional capacity development that we are talking about. Similarly there is research that can only be done in Nepal. That may be of interest because the problems may have wider implications. 

I would like to invite you and other colleagues to give careful consideration to the above-mentioned ideas and see what is realistically possible and what is not. Even at the human level, the person-to-person level, the friendships, the professional relationships, the cultural relationships are so gratifying and you’ll only know it when you are engaged in the process. You can ask Bob [Woollard] how he feels about it. For example, until recently he had never been to Nepal; now he’s traveled there three times and I think he finds the experience quite exciting. Such transformation is possible for other individuals as well. That is the charm of engaging in this international collaborative program. There are institutional benefits; there are national benefits; and there are individual benefits. 

Source:http://www.pahs.edu.np/assets/bearbones-jul2007-karki.pdf

Read more!

An Interview with Dr. Janardhan Lamichhane

Dr. Janardan Lamichhane, head, Department of biotechnolog, KU, is one of the most senior faculty member at KU. He has been working at the university since its establishment. Recently, he completed his PhD from Sun Moon University, South Korea and is also a member of the scientific sub committee of Nepal Academy of Science and Technology (NAST). This blog thanks him for his time to share his experience with us in this interview.

BMC: Janardan Sir, Namaste, thank you for your time to share with your views.
Dr. Lamichhane: Namaskar, thank you for inviting me to this interview.

BMC: Please update the blog readers with the latest activities of KUPA.
Dr. Lamichhane: These days KUPA is forced to visit the Supreme Court. KU management has tried to downplay the activities of KUPA by engaging it in unnecessary activities. However, the energetic KUPA members never take rest to raise their voice against the faulty decisions of the management. On New Year Eve, KUPA members were busy in discussing the problems of KU with minister of Education Dr. Mangal Sidhhi Manandhar.

BMC: Some faculty members tried to create obstacles against KUPA when it was being formed. What is their motive, what do they want? Why do they fear?
Dr. Lamichhane: Their motive is nothing more than to please the KU management. They want to get quick benefit with the de-stable situation of KU. They think that their offensive acts against KUPA will help them to take credit from management in this situation, which they can cash to fulfill their selfish motives. At the same time they fear to do so directly because they have realized the strength of KUPA and their own position.

BMC: How do you see the recent changes in the KU administration?
Dr. Lamichhane: In my view, changes in KU administration are just to balance the situation of Dr.Sitaram's outgoing. They don't want to show the vacancy in registrar's position, rather they want to fill all decision making post by their own "yes man". At the same time, some of the posts have been given to these people who were actively involved in neutralizing KUPA's activities in the past. So they want to show some undecided people that lobbying the present management can be beneficial to them to rise in the higher posts.

BMC: Recently KUPA general secretary wrote on this blog that he is for complete change in the management system of KU. What does that mean? How do you hope to get support from the faculties?
Dr. Lamichhane: I can't say exactly what is his intension but I can guess, it means to change the ideology of a management group completely. Presently, every well wisher of KU can say that without complete change in the pattern of thinking and running of KU in transparent and democratic way, propagating it as an international institution is almost impossible.

All those faculties who believe that their moral stance and suggestions in this situation are important to KU are with KUPA physically and mentally. Those who don't want to show themselves openly against the management are also supporting KUPA morally and indirectly. People should realize that KUPA was not formed to confront the management but to expose the corrupt practice of the people in the present management for the overall betterment of KU. KUPA will support KU management in future if it functions transparently and democratically. However, there are few who are eager to take advantage of this volatile situation. For this they are ready to do anything, even lose the morality and credit among other colleagues. They have gone as far as spreading rumors to discredit KUPA.

BMC: KUPA's formation was a huge hurdle for all of you, where as KUAA was formed so pleasantly. What's the reason?
Dr. Lamichhane: Yes, it's really funny to everyone. An association that has to be supported by the management to create good environment inside the university is rejected and harassed, whereas, the association that has to be formed by the ex-students independently on their own, is supported by the management. I too being alumni of KUAA was not informed and invited during the formation of executive body of KUAA. But now, after the declaration of KUAA executive body, I can guess that why the process of forming KUAA was kept in secret and why all of us were called only during he time of inauguration.

BMC: What do you think of Nepotism in KU?
Dr. Lamichhane: Several newspapers have published this matter for the last 8 months and everyone can see and check the KU organization chart and clarify themselves. I think I need not further extrapolate it.

BMC: Many faculty members, who worked in KU since the beginning, have complained that Dr. Sharma's stepping down is in the best interest of KU. What do you think about that?
Dr. Lamichhane: In my views, there are two options. Either he has to change his attitude of thinking about KUPA and its members and lead KU in democratic manner accepting and respecting views and all kinds of suggestion for improvement, from KUPA, KUSA or any other well wisher of KU, for the better institutional environment or to step down. The main point is that KU needs a transparent and democratically working management, which can boost up the academic environment to face the present challenges of the world. I feel that Dr. Sharma's start was excellent and everyone believes that he did a great job to establish a university but for the time being he turned to be a good creator for his surrogates and lost his altitude of a great person.

BMC: Some faculty members get benefits like paid leave very easily but for the others it's not so in KU. Is it correct?
Dr. Lamichhane: Yes, its true.

BMC: When Dr. Sitram Adhikary was awarded with professorship, what procedures were taken?
Dr. Lamichhane: I don't know the exact procedure that KU had taken during that time. However, I know that there was no any open advertisement or any notice in KU notice board for this professorship.

BMC: In order to make KU a pleasant place for everyone, what should KUPA do? Doesn't' it have to dig out the old files if KUPA really want to clean everything?
Dr. Lamichhane: KUPA needs to create a pleasant environment to everyone so that any faculty can come and discuss his/her matter. KUPA needs to organize some discussion forum or interaction program and has to prove that its establishment is for the betterment of university and the faculties who are working under KU. KUPA needs to develop itself as a watchdog of KU management's functioning. It has to suggest and help the management if they seek KUPA's help. If management is good then KUPA need to turn as helping hand and be a suggestion making body for the betterment of KU.

Its KUPA's responsibility to check the mismanagement that may have happened in the past at KU or that will happen in the future. The day will come when everyone will see the facts of KU management. In the case if the management had done some mistakes, they must take responsibility and face the court, otherwise they need not worry.

BMC: What do you think about the present court case related to the permanentship of the KU faculties?
Dr. Lamichhane: I think it's an indirectly created situation of KU management itself. Otherwise, where were those people when one of the senior administrators was upgraded to 6 levels in 7 years of his working in KU without any open advertisment? Why the person who has lodged the case in the court is frequently found to be using KU vehicle? Why the management didn't declare the result of interviewed faculties and staffs even when the court has not given the stay order? What does all these indicates?

BMC: Any message to blog readers
Dr. Lamichhane: For the last few months blog is trying to expose mismanagement and nepotism in KU and providing the platform for all the well wishers of KU to express their views. Taking this opportunity I request all blog readers to provide suggestion to lead KUPA in positive direction and establishment of a better environment in Kathmandu University.

BMC: Thank you very much
Dr. Lamichhhane: thank you too.

Read more!

An Interview with Dr. Bibhuti Ranjan Jha

Dr. Bibhuti Ranjan Jha is amongst those teachers/professors who have never been able to secure due recognition in KU because of despotic, casteist and parochial politics of Suresh Raj, Sitarama, Pushpa Raj and many other narrow-minded administrators. However, under the guidance of Dr. Bibhuti Ranjan Jha, a real son of Nepali soil, KUPA movement has come to a new height and we are all in a strong position to challenge and decimate the forces of status quo in KU. This blog has recently conducted an interview with Dr. Bibhuti Ranjan Jha, who holds righteous claim to every top-notch position in KU, but presently deprived and sidelined by Suresh Raj and his regime because of his being real son of the soil. Please find the excerpts below:

########
Interview
########
BMC: Can you please throw some light on your past association with KU?
Dr. Jha: Its been ages. This February it will be 14 years since I joined KU. I remember it was sometime in June or July 1992 that I gave my first interview to KU. The VC, Registrar (Dr. Sitaram Adhikari), Dr. BMT, Prof.Rimal and few more faces were there to ask questions. KU started the academic session with I.Sc. program from the August same year but I was not called to join. It was during winter vacation that one fine day Prof.BMT asked me to come to the school at Gahanpokhari in Kathmandu. The next day I went there and was asked to meet Dr.Wagley who was the head of Biology Department. He enquired whether it is possible for me to take classes from the next day. I said yes, and rest is the history that began from Feb.1993.

BMC: Having worked for this many years since founding KU, what is your impression about this institution?
Dr. Jha: It is a mixed impression. The beginning was great and exciting. It appeared as if everyone involved in the university has some mission. All were working hard and with discipline and purpose. I remember, many of us would surround our VC and listen to his inspiring words for hours without sitting. He was such a vision and attraction then. With the support from all sides the university was growing fast and in a positive direction.

However, compromises on norms and values of the university were already made on those initial days and is still continuing. We didn’t care at that time as most of us were too focused in dream objective of making the university of world standard. And now many of us feel that those tampering were less of a blunder and more of a deliberate move to bring the present chaos and crisis in the university. In the name of our political and social structure, undue and unethical advantages were given to some top politicians, government officers and others. Back in the university, we were told that such leaders and officers are ruthless and can do anything to disrupt and dismantle the university if they are not obliged. Most of us believed the story at that time. But when we analyze today, it seems a shrewd and cunning move of the authorities to save, extend and consolidate their regime in the university. You can judge that conclusion by the fact that all three of the founder (VC, Registrar and then Dean of Science) had an unquestioned regime in the university since its very beginning, i.e., since last 15 or 16 years. I am not against any individual, but just think how a new person could evolve in such an environment when no one at the top 1, 2, and 3 is moving anywhere. When such things happen, all kind of irregularities, abnormalities and malpractices happen in the institution. Kathmandu University is no exception to that. It is a general feeling among the faculties that the good teaching and learning environment now at KU is only due to their sincerity, hard work and modesty. The staff, students, and the larger section of parents and local community are also helping the cause. However, indications are there that the authorities are busy doing politics, recruiting antisocial elements and running the institution in unprofessional ways. I would only say that such a good institution is heading towards a grave crisis and the only reason is authorities.

BMC: KU recently claimed that the hiring and promotion at KU are not based on nepotism; instead there are certain rules that apply. There has to be advertisement, evaluation committees, experts are called for interviews before they promote someone. Someone failing to qualify loses his jobs. Did they follow any procedure?
Dr. Jha: People can only laugh at such a claim. It is no more a secret now that the greatest rogue of KU is Nepotism. There would be very few examples that might exceed KU in the world in having such a large congregation of bloodline and in-laws of all the authorities. Even the private business houses may not have such an assemblage. Somehow the authorities do not realize that these guys are engulfing the entire KU. Not only that the persons working in the interface too, such as legal advisor, auditor and certain media persons etc. have to be their kith and kin or pets. These people are there to hide the chaos and mismanagement inside the university. Most of them have come through backdoor, are mostly incompetent and hence their weapons are conspiracy and chakari. All the channels of constructive criticisms and good suggestions from general faculties, staff and parents/students are totally blocked by these fellows. It also seems that the authorities only want to listen their praises, which are done all the time by their own people.

They do everything about hiring and promotion according to law and rules of the university but the VC has such a sweeping power that he can do virtually anything. To make matter easier for him, there is a makeshift selection committee with yes men, which is a complete puppet. The biggest evidence of this is their tenure, which never seems ending like that of VC and company. So, on paper they follow the rules and regulations but not on the true spirit.

Check these examples: Most of the Professors at KU are by executive decisions rather than formal interview by external examiners. When there is hidden rule for a faculty to have Doctorate or additional degree to become assistant Prof. in science and engineering, there are Professors in Management and Medicine with lesser degree. There are six promotions in as many years for a privileged one but many faculties and staff have to leave the job in absence of the promotion.

BMC: Dr. Sharma doesn't listen to his co-workers. He dictates them, so the principled academicians hesitate to work under him and leave the job sooner or later. Only yes men stay intact with him. Do you disagree with it?
Dr. Jha: I tell you the story. There was a big urgent meeting called by VC after more than 60 faculty members signed and sent a paper raising question about unprofessional and untransparent way of donating money to the injured people during last revolutionary movement in the country. After usual round of thrashing staffs, VC, Registrar and BMT thought everything was under their control. When Dr.Roshan wanted to speak in behalf of the teachers, the VC at first refused to listen. He said if it is on behalf of the teachers who have signed, he would simply not listen. Look at his pride. My goodness! However, he had to listen. He was forced to listen. May be first time in his days in KU he faced such a humiliation. Suddenly so many people were raising voice in front of him. Getting clap for every sentence. It was as if the terror of tyranny was over and everyone felt so liberated, yet there is so much discipline among the staffs. The same signature campaign has now evolved into KUPA, KUSA and SWC.

Before that, the staffs of KU were very much afraid of VC and other authorities. Many had just left the institution because of that. However, now the general staff are not alone and they can fight for the rights and justice.

BMC: There is a virtual organization in KU called No-KUPA, isn't that offensive?
Dr. Jha: So far we have not heard of virtual No-KUPA. Yet we all know that there are a few faculties who are not in favor of KUPA. Authorities of KU even tried a step to set up another teacher’s body but it failed mainly because it was not backed up by many faculties. This indicates even those faculties who are yet to become KUPA member believe that KUPA is fine and it is unhealthy and unethical to go against its spirit. There could be a lack of clarity and some reasons that they have not taken the KUPA membership. Otherwise they are most welcome to join the organization.

BMC: What is your assessment of current KUPA activities?
Dr. Jha: KUPA is still in a formative stage but the general members and the executives are a committed lot. I would say, KUPA has shown remarkable maturity in its activities. Whatever allegations the authorities have been trying to fabricate to tarnish the image of KUPA, it has been a failure. So far the success of KUPA has been because of the genuine demands it has put forward and the mismanagements it has pointed out. And on top of that it has kept its integrity and thus rapidly increasing its popularity.

BMC: Sir, you have been there in KU for a long time. Could you please let us know why the administrators mistreat the teachers in KU?
Dr. Jha: Oh! By now there are many examples of such mistreatment. You can start the story from Dr.Wagley, who was the first HOD of Biology department at KU. He was a dynamic personality and liked by all. But he left KU due to the ethical differences and subsequent lack of respect to the authorities. You have such examples from all the departments. Most of the faculties or staffs who left KU or victimized, were really good, sincere and were men and women of principle and values. They did not hesitate to point out the malpractices, and lack of professional environment in the University. And the authorities have taken these as some kind of threat to their regime. In fact, they always wanted an unquestioned regime in the university. They have a kind of policy of either terminating or at least harassing and threatening those faculties and staffs who disagree with their way of running the institution. And many non academic staffs have learned from them to disregard the teaching faculties. These staffs are encouraged and rewarded for doing so.

Also it seems the authorities have a feeling that those who disagree with their way of running KU should and would quit making their regime smooth. However, this time, specially the members of KUPA/KUSA are committed to stay and change the regime for the betterment of KU.

BMC: Some of the faculty members openly resent that Dr. Sharma and Dr. Adhikary alone are taking all the credits for the success of KU. Is it ethical for Dr. Sharma and Dr. Adhikary to do so?
Dr. Jha: That’s the problem with them. Time and again they take satisfaction by personal glorification. At times they forget that the words of glorification sounds better from the society and ordinary people rather than self, relatives and some handpicked people who has taken undue and unethical advantage from the university. Also there are people who blindly think that Dr. Sharma can do no wrong. However, there numbers are on decline for sure.

In fact I agree that they have done tremendous job to establish the university but they should not forget that it was backed by faculties, staffs, students, local community, government machinery, civil society, donors and international community. So if they forget and want to take all the credits, then be sure that their feet are not in the ground.

So, many people, groups and institutions are involved to bring KU at this stage.

BMC: It appears that Dr. Suresh Raj is interested in dividing the faculties of KU by associating them with the concerned schools only. Is it not possible for all the professors to unite under a common umbrella?
Dr. Jha:This is a new strategy by VC, which came after the emergence of KUPA. He is trying to play a divide and rule game. Stronghold of KUPA is the school of science and probably most hated and neglected these days. However, it is also the strongest school of the university. School of Engineering is also at the same venue, but do not seem strong because many of the faculties are fresh and junior, some senior faculties are confused and unclear about academic values and freedom, while still some are more confused as they are enjoying petty privileges, which they think will go if they join KUPA. I would say school of medicine is much stronger and progressive than engineering at the moment. Many may not agree but the simplest measure of this is the number of KUPA membership. So it is difficult for authorities to play game in medicine at the moment. Therefore, their attention is shifted to KUSOM, where there are hardly 4 or 5 full time faculties and is much easier to handle them. Education also has hardly 4 or 5 full timers. These two schools are in the valley and most of the meetings by authorities concerning the demands and activities of KUPA are held in this venue secretly. Some secret meetings are also held in DMI. In all, they seem to segregate schools in this way, but will not help them.

BMC: Sir, we heard that Suresh Raj instigated Prof. Pushpa Raj against you, is it correct?
Dr. Jha:I am not aware of that. Only thing I could say about Pushpa sir is that he has shattered all the hope, respect and confidence shown to him by his colleagues and staffs. The person once used to be surrounded by colleagues and friends all the time due to his inspirational simplicity is now isolated into a corner of examination office. For me he looks so deserted and lonely. However, he chose to be like that. Several times he has said that certain things like nepotism in KU are at the worst condition but he would not like to fight against it with authorities all the time. However, our stand is that, if something is wrong and is consciously done wrong, then there is no way to compromise. That’s what the finest academicians do, and expect from others.

BMC: People claim something fishy about Pushparaj, do you agree?
Dr. Jha: I have already mentioned so many things about him. This time I would only say people’s claim has substance.

BMC: Sir, Pushparaj used to claim that he was democratic. But his behaviors show that he is a mandale. What do you think?
Dr. Jha:Again, just a simple answer: he is not democratic at all as he claims.

BMC: What, in your opinion, could be the reason Suresh Raj always preferred Sitaram as registrar of KU?
Dr. Jha:Specifically it is difficult to say why VC always wanted Dr. Sitaram as registrar. But indirectly may be we can make a list of the reason: long term association (since Valley Campus time), to exploit his connections in government and judiciary, typical bureaucratic mindset and execution, expert in manipulating things including financial aspect, family relation and neighbor etc.

BMC: Is Sitaram justified in appointing both of his sons in KU?
Dr. Jha: It seems actually there is a hidden pact between VC, Dr.Sitaram and BMT that since they have made the university, they should share the fruits among themselves. There is no way they can justify that not only their sons and daughters but brothers, sisters and in-laws as well who are working in KU.

BMC: Sir, should not Suresh Raj and Sitaram disclose their property details?
Dr. Jha: I think your question is pointing towards corruption and financial irregularities at KU. There are no direct evidences about this. However, they have handled the institution for more than 15 years without any external monitoring. In addition, during these years they have not come up with a single welfare package for staffs but, when it comes to construction and buying real estate they have always shown extreme eagerness. Some of the contractors for the constructions are fishy. The purchase of material and equipment requirements of the university is noncompetitive and nontransparent. And there are many other mismanagements of university resources. Thus, it is high time that a powerful independent probe should be allowed to see the true financial situation. It could be a good test to the authorities as well to show if they are clean in all matters.

BMC: Asst. Prof. Dr. Ramesh Pant claims that Sitaram tried to cause harm to him. Do you think that Sitaram can do this to former faculties who toiled hard for betterment of KU? Can you please elaborate on contributions of Dr. Ramesh Pant?
Dr. Jha:I have no idea about that claim by Dr.Pant. However, from my personal experience Dr.Sitaram could go to any level if he wants to harm. As far as Dr. Pant is concerned, he is one of the oldest faculty at KU and has been always admired by the colleagues and students. He has all the qualities to be an excellent academician.

BMC: It has been reported that Suresh Raj tried to create division between SWC and KUPA. What do you think about the role of SWC?
Dr. Jha:He has tried. Rumors are there that some students even received some money for going against the teachers. Rumors are also there that some HODS motivated and threatened the students to go against teachers. However, the authorities didn’t realize that such attempt is only artificial, hollow and temporary. The natural union is always between teachers and students. The teachers who are involved in bringing changes did in fact received respects and backing from most of the students. We are all proud of our student.

BMC: What happened to a four party agreement reached between the management,administration, teachers and students?
Dr. Jha: The last uprising ended in a good spirit with that agreement but it seems the authorities are not serious and faithful. They have not delivered anything even after around 6 months of that agreement. Instead, they are into number of conspiracies. There are sufficient evidences to point them regarding the legal case, by which they want to put own teachers and staffs in hassles. Either they may be happy or buying the time for themselves, they should realize that they are playing the games against highly qualified and dedicated bunch of the people. It will backfire them.

They have also bought some time and ground by negotiating the affiliation of Nobel Medicals in Biratnagar with the Prime minister, even though, the policy of the university no more allows such affiliations. This is nothing new as they have been bowing down with the power since the beginning, but the new thing is that they had to do it secretly and shamefully. It seems they realize the total depreciation of their command and respect by doing these.

KUPA is busy these days in their election, but I am sure they will take account of all these once it is over.

BMC: Thank you very much sir.
Dr. Jha:Thanks

Read more!

An Interview with Asst. Prof. Danda Pani Acharya

Danda Pani Acharya was a former Assistant Professor of Physics at Kathmandu University. He joined KU in 1997. He was very sincere, dedicated and hard working and has served KU more than five years in different capacities. Currently he is working towards his PhD in atom manipulation using Low-Temperature Scanning Tunneling Microscope in the area of nano technology in Ohio University, Athens, Ohio, US. Recently the blog management team had chance to interview him. Here are the excerpts

BMC: Can you please throw some light on your past association with KU?
Mr D.P.: I joined KU in 1997 as a lecturer and later as an assistant professor. Before joining KU, I was teaching in the Central dept. of Physics, TU, Kirtipur. I worked in KU for more than five years until I came in US.

BMC: Having worked for this many years, what is your impression about this institution?
Mr D.P.:In my understanding KU is a non-profit making, community based academic institution. Believing that KU was a good place to work for young faculty like me I joined KU even though I was getting less than what I was getting in Kathmandu I found all staffs were very enthusiastic and dedicated and the students were very laborious.

In all academic institution teachers and students are considered to be the main stakeholder. But I found KU as an administration dominated institute. There was also nepotism and favoritism. The way it was running seems like a private family business company. There is no need of qualification to get job by the relatives of VC and registrar. The career development opportunity depends on their mercy. Moreover there is big corruption.


BMC: Do you agree that the promotions at KU are academically transparent?
Mr. D.P. Absotuly not. They have two faces- one to show and other to act. Getting job and promotion in KU is very easy for their relatives and “yes” men but for the people like us it is very difficult. I tell you the example of their transparency. Myself, Manish and Brijesh's interview were taken at the same time but their result was published within a month but it took more than six months in my case. How is that transparent ? They also got paid leave several times but they terminated my job when I requested for study leave.

BMC: How supportive was KU administration when you tried to pursue PhD in Physics?
Mr D.P.: Very rediculious. VC and registrar were very discouraging. They do not want anybody go outside for career development except few they wants. They want every body to be their “yes” man. They just want staffs who take chalk and duster and do nothing extra either for their career development or in other program or policy change so that they can keep them so long as they wants and fire them blaming of not improving the qualification when they does not want. In my case when I got chance to come US for Ph.D I requested for study leave. They gave me verbal assurance and allowed my family to stay in quarters in Banepa. But after two months when I was in US they send a letter of job termination to my home address and asked my family to leave the quarters immediately. That was very difficult time to me. I felt that these guys have even no character of humanity. The fact is that their relatives got paid leave several times but in my case they terminated my job for asking the study leave.

BMC: Recently KU claimed that they send their faculties to US for PhD on study leave. You also went to ICTP, Italy for post graduate study prior to going to US.
What was KU's role in this? is the KU's claim correct?
Mr.D.P.:They want to fool the outside people. This is a great lie. I had gone to ICTP in my own effort and USA also. Rather we had to keep secret our process of applying for study from these administrators in KU. When I was in ICTP I tried to help KU by providing books worth of thousands of dollar through ICTP and funded by UNESCO. Director of the program was my professor and I had requested her to donate books to KU. She contacted several times to KU authorities but none of them responded. Finally she had to give up and KU had to lose books worth of many thousands of dollars. I was very disappointed to lose that funding which was supposed to run for long time.

BMC: Some people say that present university act is passed in hurry without enough discussion and therefore incomplete for creating good academic environment. What is your impression about it?
Mr. D.P.: Thank you very much for this good question. The university act was passed in 2048 BS when just the democracy was established in the country. Then government had formed a committee to recommend education policy. But Kathmandu University act was passed before the submission of the committee's report. So the present Kathmandu University act contradicts with the education policy of the country. This act centralizes all the power to VC and registrar. Therefore they are misusing the power to do monopoly in the University. It needs to be revised immediately for betterment of Kathmandu University.

BMC: Some of the faculty members openly resent that Dr. Sharma and Dr. Adhikary alone are taking all the credits for the success of KU. Is it ethical for Dr. Sharma and Dr. Adhikary to do so?
Mr. D.P.: I agree that they had taken the initiation for the establishment of KU and also did good role for its establishment. But they publicized their work in such a way that KU is their private business company so that no one should bother about what is happening in KU. Hard work of young competitive teaching and non teaching faculties is never recognized and appreciated by the authorities anywhere else. They have created such an environment in the society that they are the only person who deserves all the credit and non for others. That is not the reality. Every donor, student, teacher, staff and community people should get equal credit to bring the university up to this stage. Now it is high time to uncover this reality.

BMC: What do you think is the urgent step in order to make KU a better place for everyone?
Mr. D.P.:In my opinion there are few steps needed to be done immediately. Firstly the present management team has to be changed. Secondly there is an urgent need to form a high level committee to investigate the financial and all other irregularities that are been raised by different people and bring the guilty to the court. Finally the rule of law has to be applied equally to every one without discrimination.

BMC: This blog appreciated the efforts of KUPA for complete mnagement change in KU. Do you have any suggestions for KUPA?
Mr. D.P.:I wish KUPA can stand in the favour of all dedicated family members of KU and will not compromise without getting its goal. KUPA so far is doing good job by raising the issues which needed to be done long before. I suggest to be aware of not getting any political color also.

BMC: Thank you very much sir.
Mr.D.P:Thank you also for giving me an opportunity to share my views.

Read more!

An Interview with Dr. Nirmal Joshee

Dr. Nirmal Joshee is an Assistant Professor at the Fort Valley State University, in the Department of Plant Sciences (Agricultural Research Station), Georgia, USA. He has served Kathmandu University for 3 years in as an Assistant Professor. He was a very dedicated, hard working and honest faculty in Kathmandu University. He was always seen to motivate the students towards research activities. Recently the blog management team had a chance to interview him, here are the excerpts:

BMC: Good Morning Sir.
Dr. Joshee: A very good morning to you too.

BMC: We have had a very good opportunity to interview you today. Could you please let us know your past association with KU, and in what capacity?
Dr. Joshee: I joined KU as a temporary Assistant Professor in 1995. I came back from Japan after completing four years of post doctoral work on molecular biology of water stress induced genes in rice.

BMC: Having worked in KU, what is your impression about this institution?
Dr. Joshee: Very confusing. That is why I am here in US.

BMC: You have worked very honestly for KU as both a good researcher and a good professor, how did you feel while coming to US?
Dr. Joshee: I departed KU with mixed feelings. One way I thought that I have lost an opportunity to establish good foundation at KU in the important area of biotechnology, but at the same time I was happy with the hope to join a lab / department / university in USA, where I will be just recognized by my hard work and credentials only.

BMT: Could you present a glimpse on their saying that the deserving candidates get priorities when hiring, promoting and while granting leave. What makes one eligible?
Dr. Joshee: Yes, deserving, but in what sense? One example- I was very sad the day Dr. Mukesh Chalise left the university. He is a very good teacher, serious and accomplished researcher and students adored him. He was with biology department since the days of Valley Campus being part of all the early spade work. I really do not understand, why wasn’t he promoted as HOD?

Another example, when I joined KU in 1995, I had my Ph. D., that I received in the year 1987, had experience of carrying out research in USAID projects from 1989 to 1991 (at RLABB), got the Rockefeller Foundation biotechnology fellowship to visit International Rice Research Institute (IRRI, Philippines) for three months in the year 1990, and had an experience of four years long post doctoral research at Biotechnology Institute, Akita, Japan. I requested them to consider my case for Temporary Associate Professor (Reader) subject to evaluation but they had their own yardstick to evaluate. So, I worked as a junior to people who were there first, though only M.Sc.

BMT: So there are some people in KU who are privileged? Is that right?
Dr. Joshee: There is nothing wrong in that as long as it is ‘some’. Even in a family, parents side with the weaker one. But not at the cost of others.

BMC: KU authorities have always emphasized verbally that faculties should enhance their research activities. How is your impression about that? Did KU send you to US for your research? Or does KU have any role in sending you to US?
Dr. Joshee: I proved that by bringing in grants. But that did not help me at all. I am not related to any KU authority. Why would they send me to US?

BMC: KU authority was unwilling to cooperate when KUPA was being formed. What could be the reason behind that?
Dr. Joshee: So that they do not have to leave KU unceremoniously.

BMT: There is a virtual organization in KU called No-KUPA, what do you think about such parallel organizations in KU?
Dr. Joshee: Freedom of expression is a right to be used in proper manner. If they have something sensible and beneficial to KU and its most important component ‘students’, that is fine.

BMC: Recently this blog has learnt that No-KUPA members are being promoted, would that be a good motivation to academic honesty?
Dr. Joshee: Certainly not, specially when they do not deserve it on the basis of merit. But if they qualify, nothing should be held against them either. With the same token, if KUPA members do not qualify, they should not be promoted too.

BMC: There is no doubt that Dr. Sharma was solely responsible for the establishment of KU. With the allegation from all sides, do you think he is still capable of leading this institution?
Dr. Joshee: I certainly believe that he conceptualized the idea of KU, but he was lucky to have people around him trusting in his dream and do their utmost. But at the same time he should be credited with what is happening now. You can not take credit for successes alone. That is a package deal when you lead.

BMC: Dr. Sharma doesn’t listen to his co-workers. He dictates them, so the principled academicians hesitate to work under him and leave the job sooner or later. Only yes men stay intact with him. Do you disagree with it?
Dr. Joshee: I was in the department of biology and that place was a good example of what you are saying.

BMC: How do you see the charges of Nepotism against Dr. Sharma and Adhikary?
Dr. Joshee: I have heard about that all the time, and felt it many times. But I never learned from authentic sources that who were their relatives receiving undue advantages.

BMC: Don’t you think the administration controls the dean’s offices by assigning voiceless people in dean’s offices?
Dr. Joshee: I have no idea in this respect. I never had a reach to that high level of administration. At my position I was a mere mortal. But yes, majority of the offices, when we used to go for any official work, were prime example of ‘how not to work’. That was very sad.

BMC: Many former and current academic staffs, like you, are studying / working internationally. This advantage could be a very huge resource for KU. In what way, could KU take advantage from you?
Dr. Joshee: They really do not need anything from us. First and foremost job should be of housecleaning. It is long overdue. What can you do when all your efforts will be directed to benefit chosen ones?

Secondly, many of our students, since I left KU in 1998, came to US and other countries for further studies. They are young and real valuable resource. That is what KU should be after as many of them returned to Nepal. Any great institution or company is known by its employee retention record. Sadly, in case of KU, it is handful and those who are their, with vested interests.


BMC: What should KUPA do in order to make KU an academic institution where everyone has values, thoughts and a better place for everyone that contributes the nation?
Dr. Joshee: They should go ahead with issue based approach. They should stay focused and united, and above all honest and loyal to the cause, institution, and academics.

BMC: Any message to blog readers?
Dr. Joshee: Please pray for the betterment of KU. I started teaching there with great hopes in 1995 and left for the US greatly disappointed in Nov 1998. I still feel that if administered properly, we will have a university of international stature.

BMC: Your special message to KUPA, No-KUPA and KU Authorities?
Dr. Joshee: Take a break and build a great institution. There is still hope. And time to time housecleaning job is necessary.

BMC: Thank you very much sir.
Dr. Joshee: I am really thankful to you. Once we left KU, they never thought of us as their own. At least, you are trying to reestablish the link as we do feel a sense of belongingness to KU.

Read more!

An Interview with Asst. Prof. C.P. Pokhrel

Chandra P Pokhrel is an Assistant Professor of Physics at Kathmandu University. He joined KU when KU was only a year old. He was very sincere, dedicated and hard working and has served KU more than ten years in different capacities. Currently he is working towards his PhD in the area of organic semiconductor at the Kent StateUniversity, Kent, Ohio, US. Recently the BMC had chance to interview him. Here are the excerpts.


BMC: Can you please throw some light on your past association with KU?
Mr.C.P.: When I joined KU, the first batch of I. Sc. program was in second year. This was the time when KU had not taken its shape, and especially important, future of staffs, faculties and KU itself was quite uncertain, even though everybody worked with a strong affection to KU to make it the leading institution for quality education.

BMC: Having worked for this many years, what is your impression about this institution?
Mr.C.P.: This is an institution for which we worked so hard to establish. We were highly motivated to work. No matter what the work load was we just kept working even on the holidays. I especially used to be very eager on listen to VC’s speech. His speech used to be very motivating and encouraging. We saw our future in building KU. In the course of time when KU became an established institution the tone of VC started to change. His philosophy also changed. He saw his position secured if he could fire those who spoke for betterment of KU and hire those who were relatives and “Yes” men. Still the university is very good for teaching and learning because of the good teaching staffs. But there is a lot to do to make it better. For example, there is over staffing in administration, there is no proper evaluation system for promotion and career development, there is nepotism and favoritism, there is need of independent investigation on the financial irregularities and so on.

BMC: KU recently claimed that the hiring and promotion at KU are not based on nepotism; instead there are certain rules that apply. There has to be advertisement, evaluation committees, experts are called for interviews before they promote someone. Someone failing to qualify loses his jobs. Did they follow any procedure?
Mr.C.P.: Everybody wishes they’d follow the rules for hiring, firing, promotion and in everything. This is exactly what we want. Unfortunately this is not happening. If they had followed the rules there would not have been just their relatives serving in the administration and especially important not only relatives and “yes” men have gotten paid leave, there would not have been corruption and there would have been equal opportunity to every one for career development. You also know that they had terminated the job of very sincere and dedicated teachers who worked for more than seven years. Do you think it is fair? If the teachers were incapable why did not they say no after the evaluation of one semester or an academic year? Why did they take so long time to evaluate their own staff? Why could not they think about the future of students who were taught by incapable teachers for so long if they were incapable? This is all because they are either unfair or they themselves are incapable. So far the question of advertisement, evaluation and interview from expert is concerned; it is applied strictly to the sons and daughter of general people but not for those whom they want. They just make it formality by keeping their people in the selection committee. How much fairness do you expect when there are Suresh Raj, Sitaram, Pushpa Adhikari and Mukund in the committee? What can an expert do even if he wants to be fair when bulk of the score is in their fist? You may know there are some professors who got professorship without going through any procedures like advertisement or interview. There are so many things to say.

BMC: Dr. Sharma doesn't listen to his co-workers. He dictates them, so the principled academicians hesitate to work under him and leave the job sooner or later. Only yes men stay intact with him. Do you disagree with it?
Mr.C.P.: No, I completely agree with this. In my opinion, his biggest weakeness is that he always wants to listen about his praise. He never likes even healthy criticism. I guess either he never had worked in an environment where the opinions differ or he had worked in an environment where there were “Yes” men only throughout his career. That is why he is not friendly to principled academicians and tries to make them compelled to leave the job. Many of such faculties have left KU.

BMC: There is a virtual organization in KU called No-KUPA, isn’t that offensive?
Mr.C.P.: They might have tried to be. KUPA should not worry about the people or organization which is virtual. People working in virtual organization are in virtual world with virtual thinking. Someday they will realize their mistake when their boss ignores them when he thinks they are not useful anymore.

BMC: What is your assessment of current KUPA activities?
Mr.C.P.: It is the need of time to publicize all undue deeds of Authorities who are responsible for. KUPA is not only exposing their real faces to the general people but also opposing their nepotism, favoritism and monopoly. It looks to me that KUPA will prove itself to reform KU with the aim it was established for. At the same time, I also suggest KUPA to be aware of not getting any political color.

BMC: CP Sir, you have been there in KU for a long time. Could you please let us know why the administrators mistreat the teachers in KU?
Mr.C.P.: I see two reasons for this. First they are suffering from the disease of condescension, so they feel that “we have established this university, and therefore we deserve the right to do whatever we want”. Second, they want to stick with in KU for life long. For this they tend to possibly fill every post with their relatives only. If it is not possible at all, then it goes to the sons and daughters of general public. If it was possible to fill all teaching faculties from their relatives, there would not have been any outsider faculty. You can see the majority of the non-teaching staffs as their own relatives. It is of common experience that one cannot jump on the neck of one’s own relative but finds easy to do so with the others. Teachers are the only fellows in KU to be mistreated.

BMC: Some of the faculty members openly resent that Dr. Sharma and Dr. Adhikary alone are taking all the credits for the success of KU. Is it ethical for Dr. Sharma and Dr. Adhikary to do so?
Mr.C.P.: It is a good question. Dr. Sharma and Adhikari have a feeling that they are the only persons to establish this University. We must not only accept but also appreciate the fact that they have played the leading role to its establishment. However, one should not forget the contribution of donors, local people and a team of highly dedicated and young teaching and non teaching staffs who have spent their most fertile period of life to result in the success of KU. Sharma and Adhikari deserve credit for what they did. But it is unethical to claim for every success of the KU.

BMC: It appears that Dr. Suresh Raj is interested in dividing the faculties of KU by associating them with the concerned schools only. Is it not possible for all the professors to unite under a common umbrella?
Mr.C.P.: He knows very well how to use the principle of “Divide and Rule”. It is within the interest of all teachers in KU to be united under one organization. I hope KUPA will play vital role to unite all teachers for the betterment of students, teachers, staffs and university itself.Every kind of nepotism and favoritism must be stopped in any institution for its smooth functioning. What will be the moral of the teachers if they have to bend down before the VC and Registrar’s son and daughter? The only way to stop it is to raise voices against such a bad thing and uncover their face to the public.

BMC: When you applied for study leave did you get any moral support from the dean of the school?
Mr.C.P.: Thank you very much for asking me this question. I am one of the senior most teaching faculties in the university and I still could not get paid study leave although their relatives and “Yes” men got paid study leave time and again. Requesting a paid study leave I had talked with then dean of school of science Dr. Pushpa Adhikari but he denied to support and forward my application for study leave. Then I talked to chief administrative officer and Registrar also. Both of them assured me that I will get paid leave which I deserve because I am one of the senior most faculties. But later when I came to USA I got a letter of unpaid study leave.
The very unfair thing is that there are many peoples who are way junior to me and had got paid leave. Moreover, there are some people who not only got the paid leave but also went to china for higher study after returning from BITS violating the then existing rule that once a faculty returns after completing research should work in the university for at least three years.

BMC: Many former and current academic staffs, like you, are studying internationally. This advantage could be a very huge resource for KU. In what way, is KU taking advantage from you?
Mr.C.P.: An institution is called university when it meets the universal standards or is known universally. This can be done when its faculties are as competative as in other national and internationl institute. Luckly many of the young faculties of KU are getting training in world’s best institutions. KU should make an invironment to harness their knowledge and expertise. Unfortunately present authority is not willing to make such environment but wants them to quit KU so that it will be easier to tackle the “Yes” men and stick in the post forever.

BMC: Thank you very much sir.
Mr.C.P.: Thank you also for giving me chance to share my views. I have expressed my feelings and pointed out the things which I thought unfair without any prejudice with any body. I hope this will help to correct those who feel that they are concerned.

Read more!

An Interview with Asst. Prof. D.N. Mahato

Dip Narayan Mahato is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Physics, Kathmandu University, Nepal. Presently, he is on study leave, working for his PhD in Physics with his major research in Biomedical Nanotechnology at State University of New York (SUNY), University at Albany, USA. He has served Kathmandu University for more than nine years in different capacities. He was a very dedicated, hard working and honest faculty in Kathmandu University. Recently the blog management team had a chance to interview him, here are the excerpts:


BMT: Good Morning Sir.
Mr. Mahato: Good morning, how are you doing today?

BMT: Fine, thank you sir. Good to have an opportunity to interview you today. Could you please let me know your past association with KU, and in what capacity?
Mr. Mahato: I joined KU in February 1995 as an instructor in the Department of Physics when I was waiting for the result of my M.Sc. second year. I was promoted to temporary Lecturer after I submitted the transcript of my Master's Degree. I got the permanent Lecturer position in January 1998. It was said that one needed at least one additional degree, either M. Phil. or PhD, to get one's promotion to Assistant Professor. I completed M.Phil. from KU in service and got promoted to Assistant Professor in 2001. Now I am on study leave and working for my PhD at State University of New York (SUNY), University at Albany, USA.

BMT: Having worked for this many years, what is your impression about this institution?
Mr. Mahato: I would say, it's basically a kind of privately administered public institution that has maintained a good academic standard. However, to see this institution like a real university, it needs a lot of changes in the education and administration systems, and also in the programs of graduate and undergraduate study. Regarding the question of whether or not KU is appropriate for somebody to work, not to speak of only my impression, even every single faculty who has worked in KU right from its early childhood has never thought of abandoning such an academically healthy and progressive institution.

BMT: You have worked very honestly for KU for so many years; did you have any difficulty in getting study leave?
Mr. Mahato: I did not have any difficulty in getting Unpaid Study Leave. However, requesting a Paid Study Leave, I had talked personally to Dr. Pushpa Raj Adhikary for more than half an hour, argued with him in as many ways as I could, but did not get any green signal. Then I talked to Dr. Sitaram Adhikary for at least half an hour in his office and got the reply that they had changed the rule not to give Paid Study Leave, but he added that he could consider me as special case because of my continuous service in KU for more than nine years. I tried to strengthen my chance by talking to Dr. Suresh Raj Sharma for more than an hour in Manbhavan's Management College, got some positive expectation but eventually I received the letter of Unpaid Study Leave. While talking to him, I expressed a disparity towards KU that such a well-built institution is heading towards Nepotism Death in future, but he replied, "Do not worry, KU will have a good future because I have not appointed any bad personality in KU". I still remember this special sentence and tend to shower pity at the present situation.

BMT: But they say the deserving candidates get priorities when hiring, promoting and while granting leave. What makes one eligible? Who else could be more eligible than you are?
Mr. Mahato: That was true during the early 90's when KU was just an infant. Later on, they changed the criteria and gradually the best eligibility requirement for hiring, promoting and granting leave has publicly been seen to be the member of their family, one way or the other. Honestly speaking, I do not see any reason for not granting me the paid leave, except I did not come of as their family member.

BMT: So there are some people in KU who are privileged? Is that right?
Mr. Mahato: Absolutely. If the same question goes to Dr. Sharma or Dr. Adhikary, I am sure they will ethically answer the same as I did.

BMT: Did KU send you to US for PhD? Or does KU have any role in sending you to US?Mr. Mahato: I am in USA by my own efforts, but KU has granted me Study Leave, though it's unpaid. So, the answer is "No" for sure, but "Yes", of course, on the other hand. KU compelled me disrespectfully to get my PhD. This is the great role of KU in sending me to USA. Though I am still happy, I would have been little more happier if KU had not been disrespectful to me. More important, I am feeling a kind of tired of hearing the same type of ridiculous things over and over again. Somebody had mentioned in the past that Dr. Ghanshyam Bhatt was sent to Italy by KU, which was absolutely wrong in the sense that he got that luck by his own efforts.

BMT: KU authority was unwilling to cooperate when KUPA was being formed. What could be the reason behind that?
Mr. Mahato: The reason is quite simple and obvious. They knew that KUPA was going to bring about a historic change in KU which they never liked.

BMT: There is a virtual organization in KU called No-KUPA, isn't that offensive?
Mr. Mahato: KUPA was born to fight against what is now No-KUPA. The answer is clear.

BMT: Recently this blog has learnt that No-KUPA members are being promoted, would that be a good motivation to academic honesty?
Mr. Mahato: Never, and in deed, how could that be? To be honest, this is also a kind of nepotism that seems to persist, one after another, even after such a historic change in KU. But all I can say is: "Every bad attempt has to have an unpleasant return", this is the law of nature.

BMT: There is no doubt that Dr. Sharma was solely responsible for the establishment of KU. With the allegation from all sides, do you think he is still capable of leading this institution?
Mr. Mahato: Not at all! He gave birth to KU to make a good academic institution in the country where Nepalese people, either serving the institution or being served in the institution, could get well-benefited in a democratic pattern. But the circumstances have changed a lot, and he should have his own vision to see that KU needs a new leadership to have it gain what it was meant for. I cannot blame him, but I can hope, he might be thinking of getting a respectful escape from KU so that he could hold the position of a good character in the history of KU. A creator should not see the creation to be declining!

BMT: Dr. Sharma doesn't listen to his co-workers. He dictates them, so the principled academicians hesitate to work under him and leave the job sooner or later. Only yes men stay intact with him. Do you disagree with it?
Mr. Mahato: I completely agree. In principle, nobody is perfect in all respects. One has to trust in others, too. Darkness never realizes that it is dark unless it gets light to be bright. And regarding the YES-MEN, they should never forget that dignity is also a kind of holy thing in life.

BMT: How do you see the charges of Nepotism against Dr. Sharma and Adhikary?
Mr. Mahato: If Dr. Sharma and Adhikary are really honest, they should pay the appropriate charges of nepotism that they have spread in KU by themselves.

BMT: Don't you think the administration controls the dean's offices by assigning voiceless hanumans in dean's offices?
Mr. Mahato: Definitely I do. And Saraswati Prasad Rimal is the best example. I have been the grader of exam papers in KU for a long time when he used to control the I. Sc. exam system as a whole. Once upon a time, when I asked somebody why he had been assigned for that job even though he was not capable of, the answer was that KU was giving him simply the respect for an old man. Now he has been assigned to control the Dean's office, which, possibly, he had never dreamed of, or more accurately, he was never capable of.

BMT: Many former and current academic staffs, like you, are studying internationally. This advantage could be a very huge resource for KU. In what way, is KU taking advantage from you?
Mr. Mahato: KU is an academic institution, and an academic institution can be strong only if the professionals are really strong. Having gained the training and knowledge of many things of international standard, those associated with KU could come up with new visions to help KU get built up to the top of the ladder where it could be compared with some other good international institutions.

BMT: What should KUPA do in order to make KU an academic institution where everyone has values, thoughts and a better place for everyone that contributes the nation?
Mr. Mahato: First of all, KUPA should never forget that good actions never go unrewarded and that evil deeds never go unpunished. This will make KUPA function well to maintain a healthy, fair and transparent atmosphere in KU.

BMT: Any message to blog readers?
Mr. Mahato: Think big, never get disappointed while struggling, and always try to become good. Success often comes after setbacks.

BMT: Thank you very much sir.
Mr. Mahato: You are most welcome. And thank you for inviting me for this interview. I wish BMT every success in carrying out its future role to establish a pleasant atmosphere in KU for everybody to breathe in.

Read more!

An Interview with Dr. Ramesh Pant

Recently we have conducted an interview with the senior most faculty member of KU, Dr. Ramesh Raj Pant in USA. Dr. Pant has spent considerable time and efforts in KU in bringing KU to its present state. His contributions in KU are well appreciated by all the students and faculty members. We caught up with Dr. Pant to seek his opinion on variety of issues pertaining to KU and Dr. Pant has thrown light on rampant nepotism, favoritism and lack of credibility of the Vice-chancellor and the registrar of Kathmandu University. Dr. Pant can be contacted at rrpnt@hotmail.com. Please find the excerpts of the interview below;

#################
Interview
#################

BMC: Dr. Pant, can you please inform us about your past association with KU?
Dr. Pant: I am associated with KU since its inception. I joined KU in 1994 and I am proud to say that I have taught first batch of KU students in the School of Science and feel happy to see them around as a successful individual. When I joined KU there were only two schools existed, SOM and SOS. During that time there were no facility at Dhulikhel and School of Science was in Tangal, Kathmandu and KU headquarter was in Lazimpat that facility was made available by Mr.Rana Bahadur Shah, an industrialist and social worker, without asking any rent for years. One more interesting thing about my association about KU is that I was the first person to be selected as a permanent faculty by the KU service commission and I don’t have any temporary employment record in my credit in KU.

BMC: You have many years in KU, what is your impression about KU?
Dr. Pant: When I joined KU it was like a family, there were very few people working for KU. Vice Chancellor, registrar, dean and faculty would sit across the table and discuss all the matter and we would know everything that was going around in KU. As for teachers, they have worked very hard to get the reputation of teaching excellence thinking that if the organization grows their contribution will be recognized. But after 15 years two third of the founding faculties are shown the door out of KU in one way or other. Though we suffered a lot, I still feel our hard work is not wasted and KU is one of the prominent institutions in the country today.

BMC: What do you think of KUPA?
Dr. Pant: KUPA is the professional organizational and it is the forum for professors to discuss and identify their problems and then deal with these hurdles. It is very much needed in KU and I am glad we have it now and everywhere in the world there exist such organizations. I am very happy to learn that there is the professor’s organization in KU. As a matter of fact we were not allowed to open an organization in KU and I regularly caste my vote at Sarashowati sadan for its central committee election. There were very few people at KU who used to go to cast their vote and Prof. Puspa Raj Adhikari was one of them and I don’t know his stand about KUPA these days. I would like to congratulate those colleagues who fought for this novel cause and call upon all faculty members of different school to join KUPA.

BMC: Mr. Bhatt (TKP may 24) and Mr. S Shrestha (May 26, TKP) have pointed out some misdeeds of KU authority, the Nepotism was one of the issue. What do you think of that?
Dr. Pant:If I say there is no nepotism in KU I would be making handful of people in KU happy but would be doing injustice to the institution I am working. I am away from the university these days so I cannot exactly tell what’s going on but what Dr. Bhatta and Suresh B Shrestha has said cannot be Overwritten. As a matter of fact Prof. Sharma has himself accepted this fact and says nothing wrong with that and it is their right to work for KU and this is very unfortunate. My only question to professor Sharma is that if they really wanted to serve KU what were they doing when KU was just like an infant? They came in only when they thought KU was the future university in the country and their life and job was secured here.

BMC: KU administration, in response, to the letter has alleged that Mr. Bhatt was sent to Italy and USA and he never returned back to work. Does KU have any role in sending him abroad? In what capacity?
Dr. Pant: No, Not at all. KU did not have any role sending him to Italy or USA. I was surprised to see that claim by KU administration. He used to be a bright young faculty at that time and went to these countries for further studies on his own initiatives. KUPA is now legal authority and it should find out why this wrong information was sent to the media.

BMC: Recently this Blog has exposed the salary of the controller of the examination, is the consistent with the rest of the faculties?
Dr. Pant: This has been always an issue in KU. Teachers work hard and always underpaid. Bhadraman would always defend this and now I know why Bhadraman was doing that.

BMC: Having spent more than ten years in KU, do you think Dr. Sharma and Dr. Adhikary should remain in the office or the government should look for a suitable replacement?
Dr. Pant: It’s been a while people are talking about them and their involvement in KU. Nobody can deny their contribution in the initial stage of KU but University is in a good shape now and they have had enough contribution in KU. They should now look for a very respectable exit from KU so that they will be remembered for ever. Otherwise history is very cruel and forgives nobody and even a single day in chair will be too late for them as they are loosing their credibility everyday.

BMC: What about Jalan Sharma and his involvement in KU, is the justified?
Dr. Pant: Nobody can justify such act in academia.

BMC: What do you think of the protest that Dr. Sameer Mani Dixit, Dr. Ram Prasad Ghimire and others started in KU, why didn't that happen in the past?
Dr. Pant: I would congratulate them for their fight that has helped KU in getting a step further in the course of making an institution from a private limited. But their fight is not over yet it’s just started and I wish every faculty and staff should support them in building KU an institution if they want to see their future secured in KU. Regarding your question why not this happened this before, I would say it was there, no body was happy with what was going on in KU and this year they crossed the limit. We have spoken number of times against their irregularities and our voice got low key at that time but it accumulated and brusted this year that good in one way. Had they been fulfilling those small demands put forward by teachers this change never would have happened and people would not have known their sin.

BMC: It has been openly claimed that there exists proofs of the corruption of Suresh Raj and Sitaram? Should not Suresh Raj disclose his personal property?
Dr. Pant: This is again a question of morality. People in academic institution should maintain high value and if he had so there would not be any strike at KU. Even in TU, Vice Chancellors have resigned after they were labeled such charges. I am surprised that why he still wants to be VC as he has already achieved what he wanted to and these days he is in his downfall and he should quit before being overthrown.

BMC: The blog team has learnt that KU issued a letter to your professor saying not to help you in finding jobs. Is that true? Can you put some light on who issued such a letter and what could be the motive?
Dr. Pant: Yes, that’s true. This is a personal letter to my Professor by registrar of KU and it says I am a full time faculty at KU and he should not help me getting job in the United States. I was not surprised with that as everybody knows Registrar is not an academic person and he thinks all the professors at KU are clerks. The language was so crude and rude that my professor did not understand whether he was requesting him or ordering him. Thank god, he had not written himself as professor otherwise it would have been a disaster, since here in USA they consider registrar a kind of head clerk only. I have saved that letter for future and I will talk to them about it when I come back to KU.

BMC: Do you agree that some faculties in KU are privileged, Brijesh being the top one on the list?
Dr. Pant: Well this is as clear as broad day light. Where were their competent relatives when KU was in a rented house? At that time we were the one who suffered and worked hard. Believe me; I have taught 34 periods in a week for nearly 2 years. Not only me, many of us worked there like that and when slowly KU started getting in shape they came in and started to rule. Had their parents were not in the senior position of institution most of them would be job less today.

BMC: Any message to blog readers.
Dr. Pant: Well, thank you for giving this opportunity to share my views and I will always be grateful for this. I hope all the KU well wishers come forward and stand firmly for the safe future of KU. I remember during initial days at KU, Prof Sharma would call us in a dinner meeting and request us to devote our life for KU and he will look after not only our future and career but our family as well. Now after 12 years of service if I look back and remember those words I find him as a two faced personality. So guys, if you want to live in KU fight for your right and it is the only thing that will make you survive. KU is nobody’s property it’s yours, including all faculties, staff and students.
I wish you a very happy Vijaya Dashami and Dipawali 2063.
Thank you.
 

Read more!