Jamia Millia Islamia varsity’s new night out rule for girls sparks row

News Network
September 28, 2017

New Delhi, Sept 28: Amid an ongoing row over the alleged police crackdown on girls at the Banaras Hindu University (BHU), a fresh 'night out' rule framed by the Jamia Millia Islamia (JMI) University for its female students has now triggered a fresh controversy.

The new rules framed by Delhi's central university requires its female students to ask their parents – preferably their fathers – to send a text message to the hostel warden approving their wards' plan to spend a night out.

However, no such rules exist for the male students of Jamia university, a DNA report said.

JMI's new 'night out' rules are applicable to all female students, including undergraduate and postgraduate ones, besides research scholars.

The rules require the parents to send a text message to the warden expressing their consent about their child's decision to spend the night out along with her name and her room number in the hostel.

It should also mention dates of absence from the hostel. Earlier, the residents of girls' hostels only had to get a form filled by their local guardians to get their hostel leaves approved.

Students said they have been asked to get permission preferably from the father as the university feels the mother can easily be "manipulated".

Agitated by the "regressive" move, a group of women from JMI's Hall of Girls Residence (Old) wrote to the Provost, saying the rule has been imposed without giving any prior intimation to them.

"We have been verbally told by the warden and the Provost about this new diktat, and no written notice or circular was issued by the university," said a third-year undergraduate student.

Azra Khursheed, the Provost of the Hall of Girls Residence (Old), however, termed it a "disciplinary" rule rather than a "discriminatory" one.

"There have been several instances of girls saying that they were going to visit their local guardians, but they actually went somewhere else. Keeping in mind their safety and security, the university has decided to keep their parents in the loop," she said.

Asked why such a rule is not there for the residents of boys' hostels, Khursheed said, "The safety of girls is our priority as boys can handle several situations on their own. Moreover, parents of girls trust us with their safety when they choose us over hundreds of PGs available around Jamia campus."

"The rule is a sheer violation of our privacy. We are capable of taking our own decisions. We don't need our parents' permission for each and everything," said a Ph.D. scholar.

Meanwhile, some residents of boys' hostels also criticised the move. "This is not the first time when different rules are being imposed on girls. The university has set a curfew limit of 8 pm for them even as there is no such limit for us. Unlike girls, we don't need to mark attendance every night," a first-year management student said.

Comments

Agreed. What you say is true. They will blame the university for "not taking care".

 

But, they should impose such restrictions on boys too. Although they are less vulnerable unlike females, there are chances of them falling into drugs, liquor, and othe rforms of corruption. This can also bring disrepute to the university, No.?

P
 - 
Thursday, 28 Sep 2017

Young minds never understand the wolves n sheeps skin... If something gone wrong (i hope not)  the parents , the authorities, the society will all blame the university for not taking care .

 

This is the reality...

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 12,2020

Mar 12: Three women were arrested for allegedly administrating fake coronavirus vaccines to villagers in Maharashtra's Jalna district, police said on Thursday.

The police on Wednesday arrested Beed residents Radha Ramnath Saamse, Seema Krishna Andhale and Sangeeta Rajendra Avhad, who allegedly posed as doctors and healthcare workers, an official said.

The trio met villagers of Pipalgoan in Ambad tehsil, informed them about a vaccine that could protect them from coronavirus and administered it to gullible locals, he said.

Some villagers informed Dr Mahadev Munde, a medical officer at a rural health centre, about this, after which a complaint was lodged, the official said.

Fake vaccines and bottles, which were seized from the accused, have been sent to the state health department, he said, adding that a case of cheating has been registered against the trio.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 15,2020

Thiruvananthapuram: Kerala activist Rehana Fathima has been asked to take compulsory retirement from BSNL after she was embroiled in Sabarimala row.

Stating that her attempt to enter the shrine of celibate god in 2018 had spoiled the reputation of the company among customers, the BSNL, in its order asked her to take compulsory retirement, further claiming that her acts were “subversive of discipline and amount to misconduct”.

She was suspended from service following her arrest in November 2018 over Facebook posts.

Fathima, who is a technician with the state-run communications company, said she will explore legal remedies against the order sent by her employer.

The Fathima hit headlines when she attempted to enter the Sabarimala shrine, which has traditionally been closed to women in the age group of 10-50 years.

She did after the Supreme Court order allowing entry of women in the age group of 10-50.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
January 13,2020

New Delhi, Jan 13: The Supreme Court on Monday commenced hearing on issues related to discrimination against women in various religions and at religious places including Kerala's Sabarimala Temple.

A nine-judge bench headed by Chief Justice S A Bobde said that it was not considering review pleas in the Sabarimala case.

“We are not hearing review pleas of Sabarimala case. We are considering issues referred to by a 5-judge bench earlier,” the bench said.

The apex court had on November 14 asked a larger bench to re-examine various religious issues, including the entry of women into the Sabarimala Temple and mosques and the practice of female genital mutilation in the Dawoodi Bohra community.

While the five-judge bench unanimously agreed to refer religious issues to a larger bench, it gave a 3:2 split decision on petitions seeking a review of the apex court's September 2018 decision allowing women of all ages to enter the Sabarimala shrine in Kerala.

A majority verdict by then Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices A M Khanwilkar and Indu Malhotra decided to keep pending pleas seeking a review of its decision regarding entry of women into the shrine, and said restrictions on women in religious places was not restricted to Sabarimala alone and was prevalent in other religions as well.

The minority verdict by Justices R F Nariman and D Y Chandrachud gave a dissenting view by dismissing all review pleas and directing compliance of its September 28 decision.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.