New Delhi, Feb 21: After Nobel laureate Amartya Sen brought to light the delay by the Centre in clearing his name for for a second term, the Congress on Saturday slammed BJP for mistreating the noted economist.
"Amartya Sen is a national treasure, and to be treated so shabbily is really unfortunate," the party said on Twitter on Saturday.
Saying that the Narendra Modi government does not want him to continue in the chair, Amartya Sen withdrew his candidature for a second term as Nalanda University Chancellor.
Sen, who has long been a critic of Modi, in a letter to the Governing Board of the University blamed the absence of government's approval for delay in nod from the Visitor, President Pranab Mukherjee, to his name even though the recommendation was sent to him over a month back.
"Non-action (by government) is a time-wasting way of reversing a board decision, when the government has, in principle, the power to act or not act...It is hard for me not to conclude that the government wants me to cease being the chancellor of Nalanda University after July, and technically, it has the power to do so.
"This delay, as well as the uncertainty involved, is leading, in effect, to a decisional gap, which is not helpful to Nalanda University's governance and its academic progress.
"I have, therefore, decided that in the best interest of Nalanda University, I should exclude myself from being considered for continuing as chancellor beyond this July, despite the unanimous recommendation and urging of the governing board for me to continue," he has written.
It is clear that Mukherjee has been unable to provide his assent to the Board's unanimous choice in the absence of government's approval, he said.
The Visitor has always taken a "deep personal interest" in the speedy progress of the work of Nalanda University, and given that, they have to assume that something makes it difficult - or impossible - for him to act with speed in this matter, he said.
The Board had made the recommendation in its last meeting on January 13-14.
The Bharat Ratna also rued that academic governance in India remains "so deeply vulnerable to the opinions of the ruling government".
"Even though the Nalanda University Act, passed by Parliament, did not, I believe, envisage political interference in academic matters, it is formally the case - given the legal provisions (some of them surviving from colonial days) - that the government can turn an academic issue into a matter of political dispensation if it feels unrestrained about interfering," he said.
(With inputs from agencies)