E-Paper
Haryana rights panel seeks report over ‘harassment’ of Sonepat varsity student
HHRC member Deep Bhatia, on January 16, directed the concerned functionaries to submit their reports after receiving a complaint from the student’s father, Vishav Bajaj.
The Haryana Human Rights Commission (HHRC) has sought reports from multiple authorities, including the additional chief secretary of the Haryana education department, the secretary of the University Grants Commission (UGC), the Sonepat police commissioner and the registrar of OP Jindal Global University, Sonepat, over allegations that a first-year undergraduate student was allegedly harassed and discriminated against by faculty members over an academic essay.
HHRC member Deep Bhatia, on January 16, directed the concerned functionaries to submit their reports after receiving a complaint from the student’s father, Vishav Bajaj. The complaint alleges continuous harassment, humiliation and discriminatory conduct by two professors after the student submitted an essay analysing the film ‘URI: The Surgical Strike’ on October 31 last year.
An official spokesperson of OP Jindal Global University declined to comment on the matter, stating that “an official response will be given after reviewing the order.”
According to the complainant, professors Ekta Chauhan and Sarover Zaidi did not approve of the essay and his son was deliberately failed in the subject. Bajaj further alleged that on November 7, during a class titled “Politics of Representation” taught by Zaidi, remarks were made that were “politically derogatory, inflammatory and deeply disturbing in nature,” including comparisons of the Prime Minister of India to Adolf Hitler and characterisation of national security operations as “mere gimmicks and branding exercises”.
“My son had earlier praised the Government of India, the Prime Minister and the Indian Army. After that, certain professors holding particular political views began deliberately targeting and victimising him,” Bajaj alleged.
He stated that although his son submitted an academic review of ‘URI: The Surgical Strike’, a film that honours the Indian Army, “instead of being assessed on academic merit, my son was allegedly subjected to public humiliation in the classroom and informed that such content would not be accepted, following which he was declared failed”.
The complainant said his son later approached the vice-chancellor, after which an inquiry was conducted by executive dean Badrinarayan. “The inquiry found that failing my son was unjustified and his result was revised, declaring him passed in the internal assessment,” Bajaj said, adding that the concerned professors allegedly developed enmity thereafter.
He further alleged that on November 29, during a jury evaluation, an inadvertent error occurred when a document belonging to another student was mistakenly uploaded, which was corrected in time. “However, this minor and unintentional mistake was exaggerated and turned into a major issue, and my son was declared failed in the subject Projection Drawing,” he said.
The complainant also apprehended that his son could be falsely implicated in fabricated complaints and subjected to intimidation. “My son is suffering from mental and physical distress and is living under constant fear of retaliation, academic failure and institutional victimisation for raising the grievance,” he added.
In a complaint to the vice-chancellor dated November 14, the student stated that he was asked to analyse any film, poem or short story through themes such as nationalism, caste, gender and religion. “Despite following the instructions, I was publicly humiliated and debarred from the course solely because I chose to review a patriotic film,” the student said.
