Back
Orders Re-evaluation and Probe Into Caste Bias at NLU Prayagraj
The has intervened decisively in allegations of at , directing an of a student’s answer sheets and a into complaints of caste humiliation. The court also ordered that the Head of the Department of Law and Warden of the Boys’ Hostel, Dr. Deepak Sharma, be relieved of all administrative responsibilities pending the inquiry.
A Gold Medal Student’s Ordeal
The case was brought by a PhD research scholar and a fifth-semester BA LLB (Hons) student, both studying at the university. The undergraduate petitioner, who had secured the highest marks in Constitutional Law-I—a gold medal subject—alleged that Dr. Sharma made pointed remarks at the start of the fourth semester: “jo constitutional law me highest lekar aya hai, ab mere me lekar aaye” (the one who got the highest marks in Constitutional Law, let him get the highest marks in my subject now). The student interpreted this as an indirect reference to his performance and claimed that his answer sheets in Constitutional Law-II were subsequently evaluated with discriminatory severity because of his caste.
The complaint, submitted to the Vice-Chancellor on , also cited public remarks by Dr. Sharma questioning the student’s need for , including “Tum to achchi family se ho, tumhe kyo chahiye?” The student sought an independent review of his answer scripts and , fearing retaliation. Despite repeated reminders, the university allegedly took no action.
Court Orders Double Probe
Justice Vinod Diwakar, presiding over the , made clear that the court was not expressing any opinion on the truth of the allegations. “The allegations are serious, and for that very reason they require to be examined by an after affording a to the person against whom they are made,” the judge observed.
To ensure fairness, the court ordered the constitution of two separate committees. The first, an independent committee headed by the Vice-Chancellor, will re-evaluate the student’s answer sheets for subjects taught by Dr. Sharma. The committee must exclude any original evaluator, mask the identities of the student and evaluator, and remain unaware of the marks originally awarded. The re-evaluation must be completed within one week.
The second committee comprises two judicial officers: Archana Singh-I, Judge of the , and Arun Kumar Yadava, Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Prayagraj. They are tasked with conducting a thorough inquiry into whether students from communities faced caste-based humiliation or discrimination at the hands of Dr. Sharma or any other university employee. The inquiry will also examine whether the university handled previous complaints in accordance with applicable regulations.
HoD Stripped of Duties and Measures
Pending the outcome of the inquiries, the court barred Dr. Sharma from any role in evaluating the petitioner’s answer scripts or in disciplinary or hostel-related matters concerning either petitioner. The court further directed that he be relieved of all administrative responsibilities with immediate effect.
The Vice-Chancellor has been instructed to ensure that the petitioners face no adverse academic or administrative consequences for pursuing the case. Additionally, the court ordered the Vice-Chancellor to disclose whether the university has constituted an and a under the regulations, and to explain the action taken on the student’s original complaint.
is a key concern: the court directed that the identities of students who depose before the inquiry be protected, and that the proceedings be kept sealed. The Registrar must transmit the order in to the inquiring officers and the Vice-Chancellor.
Looking Ahead
The matter is scheduled for its next hearing on , when the court will review the re-evaluation report and the progress of the judicial inquiry. The case underscores the judiciary’s commitment to ensuring that academic institutions remain free from and that grievances are addressed through impartial processes.
