Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University (HAU) has withheld two annual increments of assistant professor Dr Vinay Mahla from the Department of Agricultural Economics, a decision that has ignited debate within academic and political circles. The order, issued on May 15, 2026, cites separate administrative grounds, but the context has led to speculation about whether it is a routine measure or a backlash against a dissenting voice.
Background of the Controversy
Dr Mahla has been known for his public positions on farmers' income, agricultural distress, and student issues. Earlier, he opposed the removal of former Prime Minister Chaudhary Charan Singh's photograph from the university's 2022 annual calendar. Following that controversy, he was transferred to the Panipat Krishi Vigyan Kendra (KVK), though the order was later withdrawn after protests by farmer groups.
Research Findings and Discrepancies
In a 2024 study, Dr Mahla published research indicating that a farmer owning an average of 2.7 acres of land loses approximately Rs 1.31 lakh annually, findings that contradicted claims about the doubling of farmers' income. In another research paper from 2026, he highlighted persistent losses in cotton cultivation, stating that cotton growers in Haryana suffer average losses of nearly Rs 15,000 per acre and warning that continued trends could deepen the crop crisis.
Support for Student Agitation
Dr Mahla also came into focus during the 2025 student agitation on the university campus after he openly supported protesting students following allegations of baton charging by private security personnel.
University's Response and Reactions
Speaking to this newspaper, Dr Mahla confirmed that two of his increments were withheld. Attempts to contact HAU vice-chancellor Prof BR Kamboj for a response did not elicit any comment. A message seeking his version was also sent, but no response was received till the filing of this report. Discussions have intensified within sections of the university community over whether the decision was purely procedural or linked to issues on which Dr Mahla remained vocal.
