Wednesday, March 19, 2008

KTWV 09 Issue 05: Now its gone; No it has not!

Today's media all around India, and as far as Bangkok in Thailand, is filled with the news of the departure of Rev. Valson Thambu as the Officer on Special Duty / Acting Principal of our alma mater.

The HINDU - Chennai
Valson Thampu quits St. Stephen’s

Sify News - Online / Mumbai
Thampu resigns as St Stephen?s principal

CNN-IBN - New Delhi
Thampu resigns as St Stephen's principal

The Telegraph - Calcutta

Row outlasts Stephen’s head

Thaindian News Bangkok, Thailand
St. Stephen’s acting principal resigns

One would have thought that this would have satisfied those who were after the blood of Rev. Thambu.

But the lack of managerial skills by the Supreme Council of the College has only fueled more controversy.

Firstly, they appointed Dr. M. S. Frank as the Acting Administrator, with no administrative powerrs as all decisons have to be referred to the Head of the Supreme Council, the person who has caused all the controversy to being with, The Bishop of the Church of North India (CNI).

It is the Bishop that started the entire slide with the appointment of his son to the Supreme Council of the College!

Although the appointment of Dr. Frank may be technically correct, as he was appointed by Rev. Valson to the post of Vice Principal, it only adds fuel to the fire.

Dr. Frank is also not the seniormost member of the Faculty as Dr. S. V. Easwaran, the Head of the Department of Chemistry is. However, as Dr. Easwaran is not a member of the CNI, his seniority was ignored by the Supreme Council.

Additionally, the controversy continues in the appointment of Advocate Sunil Mathew as the new Media Adviser to the College, although he is not a faculty member.

It is obvious that it is the Supreme Council which is the problem as they do not have the skills necessary to administer the College we all love.

The slippery slope continues to draw our alma mater into the news cycle and there is no one who has the ability to do the right thing - act as Christ would have wanted us to act!

Is this a classic case of the Peter Principle? :-)

No comments: