To

Professor Muchkund Dubey

President, Council For Social Development

Sub: Resignation from the post of Editor, Samajik Vimarsh

7 October 2017

Respected Sir,

This letter is to inform you of my decision to resign from the post of Editor, Samajik Vimarsh,
the Hindi journal of the CSD, proposed to be published in collaboration with Sage
Publications.

I had been contemplating doing so for the last six months after I noticed attempts by the
CSD administration to interfere in the working of the editorial team of the journal and usurp
its powers. Till now, going against my own instincts I had restrained myself from taking this
step.

I tried to explain to you personally our editorial policy. I went out of my way to share with
you and your team the content of the journal and the rationale behind the selection of the
articles. I had expected the administration to see reason. Yesterday I realised that I was
wrong.

The letter by the Director, CSD to Ms. Neetu Kalra of Sage Publications, asking her to
withhold the publication of the journals inaugural issue, has convinced me that the
administration is simply not interested in its publication and is trying to wriggle out of its
commitment using various technicalities. The reason given in the mail by the Director is that
a legal issue has arisen as the journal is being published without the approval of the
Registrar of Newspapers and this needs to be resolved before the journal is published.

The letter in itself is improper as it bypasses not only the editors but also Prof. Manoranjan
Mohanty, the Vice President of the CSD who is now the Head of the Research and
Publications Committee. He has been supervising the functioning of the journal on behalf of
the CSD administration and is in regular touch with both editors and the publisher. The
letter was rushed to Sage without even informing the editors and the head, RPC, let alone
consulting them. It breaks the chain of command and has for all practical purposes made
the editorial team and the Head of the RPC redundant.

You were aware that Sage took a decision to go ahead with the publication of the journal,
while pursuing its request for the RNI number ten days ago. Accordingly it had informed the
editorial team that it would like to bring out the inaugural number in 2017 itself. It had
waited for more than a year for the RNI number and believed that after securing the title
Samajik Vimarsh it could go ahead with its publication. Sage is an international publisher
and brings out numerous journals in collaboration with institutions across countries. It is
inconceivable that it would even think of committing any illegality for the sake of one
journal. It must have consulted its legal team before going ahead with the publication of
the journal, while the registration process was underway.

We, as part of the editorial team, have been waiting patiently for the last one year for
clearance from Sage. The journal should have been launched in January, 2017 itself. The first
edition of the journal was ready and papers and articles for the next two also had been
finalised so that the schedule could be strictly followed. But the title was not secured and it
was impossible to publish the journal with a proposed or tentative title. So, the publishers
decided to work with the governmental agencies to expedite the process.

We were informed two months ago that finally the title had been cleared by the concerned
agency. Ten days ago we were told by the publishers that they have decided to print the
first issue while pursuing for the registration number. They asked us to immediately submit
the manuscript of the first edition of the journal.

We decided to drop one article as it had become slightly dated and the author could not
have revised it at such a short notice. We brought an article from the second number to
meet the deadline and submitted the manuscript.

Subsequently, I wrote to you for your message to the contributors and readers of the
journal as the Head of the CSD. Next morning I called you to remind you that we were
expecting your message. Then I found you reluctant. You said that apparently the publishers
were bringing out only the web edition of the journal and this was not acceptable to you. I
told you that this was not the case and the publishers were committed to bring out the
journal both in print and online. You did not sound convinced and said that the intent and
decision of the CSD was to have a printed journal in Hindi like its English counterpart and it
would be very difficult for the CSD to invest its resources only to have a virtual journal. This
issue had never come up earlier before us.

As a result, I asked Sage to put it on record that the journal would be brought out both in
print and online. With their assurance in this regard I went to you again requesting you to
write your message as the journal edition was being closed. Then you raised the issue of the
journals registration number. I shared with you the letter by Ms. Neetu Kalra in which she
had informed us that the journal could be published as the title had been secured and they
would keep working with the concerned government department to obtain the registration
number. After having seen their letter you promised me to give your message the following
day.

When I went to you yesterday for the message you told me that you had decided to
withhold the publication as you were not sure whether the content of the journal complied
with the guidelines of the editorial advisory body and also if the publication of the journal
without the registration number would be legal or not. You told me that you would consult
with the head of the RPC and also the general body members available in the town on
Monday to take a final decision regarding the publication of the journal. This was a
completely new situation which was disturbing for me.
Barely five minutes after my meeting with you I found an email in my inbox from the
Director informing the publishers about your decision to put on hold the publication of the
journal. The letter was copied to me and the managing editor Shri Dhruva Narayan along
with you and Prof. Mohanty.

This letter convinced me that the administration had little regard for the process of
discussion and consultation. Unilateral decisions were being taken bypassing the concerned
people. The promise of a discussion after the decision has been taken makes the whole
thing a farce.

It need not be said that public-ness of an institution can only be ensured by respecting
institutional processes and having regard for the autonomy of individual units constituting
the institution.

This apart, I have reason to believe that the administration has real discomfort with the
journal and the editorial team.

On more than one occasion I was told that the ideological leanings of the editorial team
were responsible for the delay in the registration of the journal. Apparently the contents of
the journal were thought to be anti-government and also the reason for the governmental
agencies not granting the registration number or delaying it. I was also told there was an
impression that the contributors belonged to a particular line of thought and there was no
diversity of viewpoints.

To be fair to you, you quite frankly told me that you would not like to put CSD in trouble by
inviting the wrath of the government by publishing matter critical to it at this stage when it
had adopted a vindictive stance vis-a-vis its critics. You as head of the institution had a
larger responsibility to ensure its survival and you could not be expected to preside over its
liquidation for the sake of a journal.

I did not agree with you but could appreciate your dilemma. You were kind enough to invite
me to edit the journal and also accept my suggestion of having Shri Dhruva Narayan as its
managing editor. You knew me, my ideological and intellectual position very well before
reposing your faith in me. You were also aware of the ideological stance of Shri Dhruva
Narayan as he had published your book earlier. Knowing us fully well you took the risk of
giving us the editorial responsibility of the journal in an atmosphere in which the
government was brazenly targeting organisations and individuals it was suspicious of.

The CSD does not have a corpus large enough to sustain itself without grants from the state
agencies. It has to tread with care. I shared this concern. I explained to you that the journal
was never intended to be an anti-government platform. It was not a forum for people to
express their political opinion. The idea behind the journal was to address the lack of
serious, rigorous social science scholarship in Hindi. It was a peer reviewed journal and
committed to give space not only to diverse viewpoints but also to expose young scholars to
different methods. The government of the day cannot be the sole reference point for
ideation and scholarly pursuit. We are against regimentation of thought, be it from left or
right or even from those who claim to be liberals but are intolerant to views which are
different from theirs.

Let me say that I found it slightly strange that an impression that the articles were anti-
government was even entertained. How could such an opinion be formed without even
knowing the contents of the articles is beyond me. But when it persisted I decided again to
clear the air by sharing with you the abstracts of the papers, the names of the reviewers,
which I should not have disclosed to anybody.

I am a person of compromises. I prefer to go extra mile to keep people with me. So, in this
case, leaving editorial pride aside, I discussed all the articles with you. Even after this
meeting, the administration continued to be suspicious. The RPC was told that matter going
into the journal needed to be vetted.

Our editorial advisory team is itself comprised of scholars of repute, belonging to different
disciplines and impeccable scholarly credentials. We drew our editorial policy in
consultation with them and with your approval we gave it the final shape. Keeping the aims
and scope of the journal in mind, we commissioned papers and articles from young and
established scholars of differing shades. The peer review process was strictly followed.
Authors accepted and revised their papers after the feedback and we as editors exercised
our discretion when necessary.

It is not a practice anywhere in the world for editors to get the articles of their journal
vetted and cleared by the editorial advisory body. Otherwise the body turns into a censor
board and the editors lose their authority and autonomy. They are reduced to being clerks
of the advisory body.

The office of the editor cannot be diminished in this manner. Let me recall the meeting of
the editorial team of the Social Change, the CSD administration and the representatives of
Sage held in July, 2017. In that meeting the Director had proposed that the contents of
journal should be run past the Advisory body. This proposal was rejected forthright saying
that the authority and autonomy of the editor cannot be compromised.

I fail to understand why the principle, which is accepted for the conduct of the journal in
English is not good for another journal published in Hindi by the same institution. Is it
because Hindi requires paternalistic supervision as it is thought to be generally excitable?

Let me also put on record that we had initiated some activities to support the journal, which
involved no extra costs. They included monthly discussions with young scholars, a Samajik
colloquium, etc. But all this was discouraged and stalled.

As I have said before I understand the constraints that the present political situation has put
on all academic institutions. It is perfectly understandable that they choose not to confront
the government and decide to survive for better days. It is not for me, nor do I have any
authority to suggest to CSD how it should function. But recalling your trust and affection you
have given me, I would like to request you to not to let administrative suspicions fetter the
workers you choose.
It is sad to see however that institutions give way even without a blow. The recent case of
buckling down of the EPW Trust in anticipation of a legal threat and removal of its Editor is
still fresh in our memory.

I would only say this very humbly that courage should not be reserved only for extraordinary
occasions. We need to practise every moment, has to be made an everyday thing, a routine.
It is not enough for the government to be asked to follow democratic norms. When we
ourselves start self-censorship, we allow corrosion of democracy. Struggle for democracy is
not without a cost either. In situations like this I am reminded of a line by the poet Dhumil:

Since we had been interacting with the authors and the wider academic community on
behalf of the journal, we will need to put our decision to disassociate with the journal in
public domain.

I would like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to you for having thought of
me and putting your faith in me by inviting me to edit the journal. I hope that this single
incident would not deprive me of your affection which you have bestowed on me so
generously.

I am deeply grateful to Prof. Manoranjan Mohanty for patiently guiding us and negotiating
with Sage on our behalf whenever it was needed.

I thank the administrative and academic staff of the CSD for their support during my time as
Editor of the Hindi journal.

Thanking you again,

With sincere regards,

Apoorvanand