A disciplinary notice served to a faculty member at Delhi University's Shaheed Bhagat Singh College has erupted into a major controversy, with the teacher accusing the administration of caste-based discrimination and selective enforcement of rules. The incident has brought to light simmering tensions within the institution, further complicated by a separate dispute over teaching workload norms.
The Notice and Allegations of Caste-Based Targeting
On Thursday, the college administration issued a show-cause notice to the faculty member, warning that his absence from duty since November 25 would be treated as 'dies non'—a period of no-work, no-pay—if he failed to provide a satisfactory explanation within three days. The notice cited his alleged unauthorised absence from mandatory official meetings, including staff council gatherings, without prior intimation or approved leave.
In a written response addressed to Principal Arun Kumar Attree, the teacher firmly denied any wilful absence. He countered the administration's move by alleging it was discriminatory in nature. The faculty member, who belongs to the Scheduled Caste community, asserted that the action amounted to caste-based harassment.
To substantiate his claim of selective targeting, he demanded the college provide attendance records of all faculty members at staff council and staff association meetings over the past three years. He also asked for details of any disciplinary actions taken against others for similar absences. He contended that no such punitive measures had ever been taken against teachers from the general category for comparable instances of absence.
The teacher warned that if the information he sought revealed a pattern of biased enforcement, he would approach the National Commission for Scheduled Castes (NCSC) to lodge a formal complaint.
College Administration's Defense and Deepening Workload Dispute
Principal Arun Kumar Attree categorically rejected the allegations of discrimination. He stated that the notice was issued purely on service grounds. "It pertains to the faculty's continued and deliberate absence from duty without sanctioned leave, despite repeated directions to attend the college," Attree explained.
He further clarified that under University of Delhi rules, faculty responsibilities include attending official meetings and participating in administrative work. Absence without sanctioned leave is liable to be treated as 'dies non'.
This controversy unfolds alongside another ongoing dispute at the college concerning teaching workload. Several teachers had alleged that the college administration asked faculty members to sign an undertaking committing to teach 18 to 20 hours per week. This mandate exceeds the University Grants Commission (UGC)-prescribed norm of 14 to 16 hours.
The issue was raised during a staff council meeting on December 17. Following this, the undertaking was withdrawn for faculty of the morning college. However, teachers allege that it remains in force for the Shaheed Bhagat Singh Evening College, whose faculty were asked to sign the undertaking on December 15. The teachers are demanding a complete repeal of the undertaking, stating it violates UGC norms.
Denying these allegations as well, Principal Attree claimed no teacher was forced to sign any undertaking for additional workload. He said faculty members had voluntarily agreed to take extra lectures as part of an academic initiative to introduce more student-centric courses. He insisted there was no written administrative directive enforcing the extra teaching hours.
Broader Implications and Potential Escalation
The twin controversies have cast a spotlight on governance and alleged discriminatory practices within the college. The teacher's threat to involve the NCSC raises the possibility of a formal investigation into the caste discrimination claims. The outcome could have significant repercussions for the college's administration and its internal policies.
Similarly, the workload dispute touches upon a sensitive issue affecting faculty across Indian universities—adherence to UGC guidelines and the pressure to take on excessive teaching loads. The teachers' collective demand highlights a growing assertiveness in challenging administrative decisions perceived as unfair or beyond regulatory frameworks.
As both situations develop, they underscore the need for transparent, equitable, and rule-based administration in educational institutions. The resolution, or lack thereof, will be closely watched by the academic community in Delhi and beyond.
