Latest
DU Beat – Delhi University's Independent Student Newspaper
Tag

dusu

Browsing
Campus Central

DU Staff Criticise Admin, Demand Expulsion of DUSU Activist Over Assault on Professor

By

DU staff, including elected members of the Delhi University Teachers’ Association (DUTA), condemn the university administration for the lack of action taken against DUSU Joint Secretary Deepika Jha for the alleged attack on a professor on duty. Several teachers’ organisations demand the furnishing of the FIR and expulsion of Miss Jha.

 Despite two weeks passing since Mr Sujit Kumar, a professor at Dr Bhim Rao Ambedkar College, University of Delhi, was allegedly slapped and physically assaulted by Delhi University Students’ Union (DUSU) Joint Secretary Deepika Jha on 16th October 2025, the university has yet to take any sort of disciplinary action against Miss Jha. The most that has been done is collective condemnation against these actions by several staff associations that describe the event as a “grave breach of academic decorum and moral authority,” as quoted by the Indian Express.

The incident allegedly took place inside the Principal’s office, in the presence of multiple police personnel. Miss Jha, who is affiliated with the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), stated that the action was impulsive and in retaliation for the professor’s behaviour. She alleged that the professor spoke to her demeaningly and kept staring at her, which made her uncomfortable. She accused the professor of being intoxicated and directing indecent remarks towards her. The professor, however, denied these allegations.

Several groups, including the CTF, DTF, DTI, INTEC (I), RSM, and SSM, termed the incident “an attack on the dignity of teachers and the academic environment of the university” and criticised the lack of disciplinary action taken against the student representatives. Since the incident, several teachers’ organisations of the University of Delhi have written to the Delhi University Teachers’ Association, demanding a General Body Meeting to be convened for the discussion of the issue.

The Association has raised several demands, one of them being the filing of an FIR and furnishing a copy of the same to Professor Kumar. The college’s emergent General Body Meeting, held on October 22nd, described the incident as “a direct assault on the dignity, safety, and honour of the entire teaching community.” One of the unanimously passed resolutions included a ban on DUSU activists from the college premises. According to a press release by the Dr Bhim Rao Ambedkar College Staff Association (BRACSA), a dharna was held on October 27th. It was joined by DUTA members, members of the academic council, and teachers from various colleges. A statement signed by Prof. Md Riyazuddin Khan, Secretary of BRACSA, advocated for the expulsion of Miss Jha and demanded justice for the affected person.

Rudrashish Chakraborty, Associate Professor of English at Kirori Mal College and former member of the DUTA Executive and Academic Council, was quoted: “Neither the college administration has lodged an FIR, nor the university administration has taken any palpable action against the culprits till now. Instead, the perpetrators of the crime have been allowed to malign the victim on social media and other platforms to distract attention from the main issue of physically assaulting a teacher on duty.” He also stated that it is obvious that the university administration is shielding culprits, “as per instructions from above.” 

He added that the silence and complicity from the administration have made the university an “unsafe space for the teaching-learning process.” Several elected members of DUTA and multiple college organisations have accused the university administration of failing to protect faculty members from intimidation. Prof.Yogesh Singh, Vice-Chancellor, University of Delhi, stated, “We have formed an inquiry committee and are working on it. A decision will be taken shortly.”

Souparnika
[email protected]

Read Also: DUTA Demands Action After Professor is Slapped by DUSU’s Joint Secretary

Image Source: Screengrab from CCTV Footage

Keep Reading
By
Campus Central

Teachers’ Bodies Demand Action After Alleged Assault on DU Professor by DUSU Joint Secretary

By

DUSU Joint Secretary Deepika Jha allegedly slapped Professor Sujit Kumar at Dr. B.R.Ambedkar College, prompting outrage from teachers’ associations, police investigation, and a DU-appointed six-member committee to probe the assault.

On 16th October, Deepika Jha, the Joint Secretary of DUSU (Delhi University Students’ Union) of the current term, was seen slapping Professor Sujit Kumar, a senior teacher of Bhim Rao Ambedkar College of Delhi University. The incident occurred at the principal’s office in the presence of the police.

Professor V.S. Negi, the President of DUTA, in his letter requesting a General Body Meeting after the autumn vacation, stated that,

This incident has rattled the entire university and is an assault on the dignity of teachers and other stakeholders of the teaching-learning process in Delhi University. Teachers from across the country too have expressed their shock and indignation.

The letter further stated that DUTA’s effort to call for a flash protest on the 17th is simply not enough, in addition to the lack of a public addressing system.

Several organisations, including the Common Teachers’ Front, Democratic Teachers’ Front, Democratic Teachers’ Initiative, INTEC (I), Rashtriya Shiksha Morcha, and Samajwadi Shikshak Manch, have come together to demand a DUTA GBM on the 16th October physical assault on teachers.

The letter further stated,

It is shocking that the perpetrators of this act of violence are acting with total impunity. Encouraged by the fact that no action has been taken against them, they are making public statements maligning the teachers and creating a false narrative of the incident. Meanwhile, the affected teachers wait for justice.

The letter saw signatories from various organisations, including the Common Teachers’ Forum (CTF), Democratic Teachers’ Front (DTF), Delhi Teachers’ Initiative (DTI), Rashtriya Shiksha Morcha (RSM), and Samajwadi Shikshak Manch (SSM).

A senior police officer confirmed that a complaint has been received and the matter is under investigation.

We received the complaint late in the evening. The video has been seen by investigators. They are obtaining CCTV footage now. The matter is being enquired into.

The University of Delhi has formed a six-member inquiry committee to investigate the alleged assault. The committee will be chaired by Professor Neeta Sehgal of the Department of Zoology. Vice-Chancellor Yogesh Singh said the panel has been directed to submit its report within two weeks. Other members of the committee include Professor Jyoti Trehan Sharma, Joint Proctor (Member Secretary); Professor Rama, Principal of Hansraj College; Professor Swati Diwakar from Environmental Studies; Professor Darvinder Kumar, Principal of PGDAV College; and Awadhesh Kumar, Joint Proctor

Image Credits- The Indian Express

Also Read – Crisis Erupts at SAU: Students Protest After Alleged Gang Rape

Divyanshi Dusad
[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
Campus Central

DUTA Demands Action After Professor is Slapped by DUSU’s Joint Secretary    

By

Delhi University witnessed an assault on one of their Commerce Professors, after he was allegedly slapped by DUSU’s Joint Secretary while being on duty.

A professor of Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar College, Mr. Sujit Kumar was allegedly slapped and assaulted by Delhi University Students’ Union (DUSU) Joint Secretary Deepika Jha and other members of Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), in the presence of police personnel on Thursday, 16th October. Sujit Kumar serves as the convener of the college’s disciplinary committee and is a senior teacher at Delhi University’s B.R. Ambedkar University.

 

The incident sparked immediate outrage in The Democratic Teachers’ Front (DTF), who claimed that around 50 students entered the college, alongside Aryan Maan, the DUSU President and Deepika Jha, the Joint Secretary, and ‘mistreated teachers, demanding the resignation of the disciplinary committee convener.’ 

 

The Democratic Teachers’ Front (DTF) issued a statement asserting that the committee was investigating recent incidents of campus violence involving students from different groups when the assault took place. The Delhi University Teacher’s Association in turn has written to the Vice- Chancellor demanding swift action and has urged the university administration to conduct thorough research and to take further measures. 

The incident has drawn widespread condemnation from the university’s teaching community.

 

Even though Deepika Jha alleged that Prof. Kumar misbehaved with her, she apologised to the entire teaching community. The professor, however, rejected the allegations. Deepika Jha asserted that she was called to the college to address complaints of `misbehaviour and physical assault’ raised by the students against Prof. Kumar. She further accused the professor of being in an inebriated state and of making indecent remarks, constantly threatening her and of making her feel unsafe. 

 

Aryan Maan, on his Instagram, implicated that the party showed up after a student was seen to be dragged by the collar by the professor in addition to him smoking within the college premises. 

 

The Joint Secretary admitted to slapping the teacher but asserted it to be an impulsive reaction to his alleged `staring’, `verbal abuse’ and `provocation’. She expressed regrets over her actions but claimed them to be a concern for female safety on campus. 

 

A DU professor, on the condition of anonymity, had given a statement: “A student from the National Students’ Union of India (NSUI) had won the president post in the college student council, and two other posts had been won by the ABVP. The NSUI student had allegedly been assaulted by ABVP members, and he had lodged a complaint against them.”

Prof. Kumar stated that he was forced to resign from his position, and the event took place after. 

In an a statement, the incident was labelled as `ABVP-led DUSU hooliganism’ by the NSUI, who condemned the lack of action by the authorities despite CCTV evidence. 

Anonymous

Featured Image source: Screengrab from CCTV footage

Keep Reading
By
Campus Central

Manufactured Choices in DUSU Elections and What Needs to Be Done Beyond the Ballot

By

Campus politics often mirrors national politics in ways that feel uncomfortably familiar. The fractures inside DU echo larger democratic patterns, while the Left continues to wrestle with questions of unity, relevance, and survival in DU’s current landscape.

Every year in DUSU elections, the positions are clean-swept by ABVP and NSUI, the student wings backed by the RSS (and by extension BJP) and Congress, respectively. Each year during the elections, questions are raised about what drives the electoral politics of DU, and the answer often isn’t ideas but an intermix of caste and class, alongside a blind display of money and muscle, not just in campaigning but even in how candidates secure their tickets. From the number of SUVs to banners and posters printed, everything is taken into account. This reflects how politics and democracy in our country often seem to operate based on social and caste equations; here, ideas and ideologies frequently take a back seat.

This time we saw an overwhelming majority of ABVP wins in DUSU; the only seat won by NSUI was the Vice President’s. After Ronak Khatri’s viral Instagram reels and popularity, NSUI might have expected a better chance, so where did it go so wrong? The answer, which connects us to the bigger picture as well, may lie in the sudden exit of Umanshi Lamba from NSUI. After Khatri, she was perhaps their most popular member, but when the party refused to give her a ticket, she contested as an independent candidate. While details on why she was denied remain unclear, it can be speculated that the party’s decisions were shaped less by ideas, logic, or strategy and more by personal relationships. A parallel can be drawn with the 2024 Haryana elections, where Kumari Selja, Sirsa MP and senior Congress leader, had expressed willingness to enter state politics and sought a ticket for a family member from Uklana, her native village. Despite local enthusiasm and Selja’s overall popularity, the ticket was denied, leading to the BJP’s win in her own constituency. This pseudo-democratic model of elections, where choices are manufactured and popular candidates among voters are sidelined, often results in the kind of politics we see in DUSU today.

When ABVP sweeps votes in this way, questions are also raised about the significance of progressive politics and organisations in DU. AISA, even with a larger cadre than other leftist groups, often fails to deploy candidates with experience and real popularity on campus. First-years are frequently fielded—students who have only just joined the university are expected to gather support, build campaigns, and become the party’s public face. The AISA-SFI alliance in DUSU was finalised only in the last week before the election, leaving their campaigns entirely separate. This reinforced the perception that the Left is not a united front. AISA and SFI often distinguish themselves because of their different parent parties, and though their student members protest similar issues, the alliance falters on these divisions. The breaking of the AISA-SFI alliance in JNU and HCU has likewise allowed ABVP to bag seats in universities where progressive organisations had enjoyed majority support for decades.

That said, it would be false to say the Left’s electoral losses are solely due to weak campaigning. More than a decade of right-wing rule at the centre has fractured university structures, making it increasingly difficult for progressive organisations to sustain themselves. Right-wing ideologies are being taught and subtly embedded into daily life, to the point of becoming the default. To bridge this gap, the Left needs to focus on building strong organisations and mobilising students through education, creating space for nuanced and alternative ideologies, and calling out pseudo-democratic elections, rather than participating in a corrupt electoral system without first demanding change.

Image Caption: NSUI vs ABVP: more muscle, less manifesto. 

Image Source: SVC Student

By Gaurika Bahl

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
DUSU

Understanding Ideologies: DUSU Candidates and what they stand for

By

There has always been an ideological conflict in the Indian political environment, which has inevitably trickled down to student politics. Understanding national sentiment and its future is thus impossible without first understanding how the youth perceives it. 

The Delhi University student election season has come and gone yet again, with another set of representatives coming into office. This year, we saw an ABVP majority within the four central panel posts, namely Aryan Maan from ABVP as DUSU president, Rahul Jhansla from NSUI as vice president, and Kunal Choudhary and Deepika Jha, both from ABVP, as secretary and joint secretary respectively. While all candidates who contested for these posts expressed concern over student welfare, different approaches were taken to this endeavour by candidates affiliated with the different parties. 

ABVP reportedly consulted over 5000 students to construct its campaign manifesto, which included largely infrastructural reforms, along with pan-DU college integration, a section on gender sensitisation, (where “Pink Booths” for female police officers would be set up around girls’ colleges) subsidised health insurance for students, while also mentioning students with disabilities, metro concessions and concerns regarding ECA admissions. Since the ABVP is the student wing of the RSS and a consequent affiliate of the present ruling government, it was noticed that many of the points brought up in their manifesto actually represent a student-centric translation of the issues talked about by the present government, such as the sanitation of stray dogs, for which it faced controversy earlier in the year due to a perceived extreme stance. 

 

On the other hand, even though the campaign manifesto released by NSUI voiced many of these same concerns, some said that the issues raised were indicative of Rahul Gandhi’s idea of opening a “Mohabbat Ki Dukan”. While addressing infrastructural, accessibility, and inclusivity issues similar to the ABVP, the party also promised the abolition of the Higher Education Financing Agency (HEFA) and its consequent fee hikes, in addition to demanding the rolling back of the National Education Policy (NEP), 2020, on the grounds that it commercialises education. The party also released a distinct “NSUI’s Women Manifesto” under which 12 days of menstrual leave per semester would be granted, in addition to pledging a zero-tolerance policy on harassment, medical and counselling sessions, a functional Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) in every college and bhaagidari or equal representation at all levels.

 

While some have said that the issues targeted by ABVP and NSUI and the solutions provided by them are “practical” in nature, students have been known to widely identify with the left-aligned organisations as well.

 

While these organisations, also contesting in the DUSU elections, were not able to secure any of the four central positions, they had their own distinct approach of expressing student issues and campaigning. SFI and AISA had dominated Delhi University student politics for years before losing popularity in recent years, and moved on to contest DUSU polls as the SFI-AISA alliance, largely representing the left-aligned groups. Much of the alliance’s popularity remains with students who recognise the money-muscle power approach of the other mainstream parties. This year, they raised demands for affordable education and hostel facilities for all students according to UGC norms, assistance with CUET admissions, and the removal of the, what they called, “bogus” SEC and VAC courses. They have also advocated for the strict execution of the Rent Control Act, especially in university and student areas, as well as for the provision of menstrual leaves through protests and highlighting the everyday struggles of queer individuals in the university space and celebrating their resistance through a campus pride parade organised recently. They have also been known to ask for the inclusion of girls’ colleges that are not affiliated with DUSU, such as Lady Sri Ram College, Daulat Ram College, and Gargi College, in the union. 

 

In addition to SFI-AISA, the manifesto released by the Disha Students’ Organisation, who put forward Yogesh Meena as their presidential candidate, where they called themselves an “independent revolutionary alternative”, put across some similar points, which were aimed at fighting the “fascist agenda” and committed to “reject[ing] the politics of hooliganism and opportunism”.

 

While every party is ultimately advocating for issues voiced by the students, it is interesting to note how the approach towards this goal differs among them, and is ultimately both a reflection and rehearsal of national sentiments from the point of view of the youth. Not only are the DUSU elections indicative of the ideological battles fought at the national level, but are also a testing ground for party strategies, messaging, and campaign strategies utilised at a larger level.

 

Image Caption: DUSU candidates’ manifestos indicative of a larger ideology 

Image Source: Daily Pioneer

Manya Marwah 

[email protected]

 

Keep Reading
By
DUSU

Why did the Voter Turnout rise, and why is it still so low?

By

 

The Delhi University Students’ Union (DUSU) elections in September 2025 saw turnout climb to around 39–39.5 per cent, a notable increase from last year’s 29.7 per cent. While this rise suggests some renewed engagement, it also means that more than 60% of students either could not or did not vote. The paradox raises a deeper question: why does a union with such visibility fail to attract the majority of its student body?

Part of the answer is structural. Many colleges, such as St Stephen’s, Lady Irwin and DCAC are not affiliated with DUSU, excluding large sections of the university. Students in these institutions do not see the elections as relevant to their daily academic lives. Even within affiliated colleges, however, participation is often shaped by what political scientists would call a cost–benefit calculation: the perceived risks and burdens of voting outweigh the likely impact of a single ballot.

For many, the costs are immediate and physical. One undergraduate recalled, “There was a huge turnout this year, and our colleges do not have the infrastructure to support the same. Many of my friends stood there for three to four hours to cast one vote. Another described the atmosphere starkly, “For the lack of a better word, I would say the main reason why I personally don’t go to vote is the sense of gundagardi that surrounds the campus.” Another student who skipped voting admitted, “There was so much stress and fear around the campus that I thought there is no point in risking my safety for one vote.”

Even when students did turn up, the presence of candidates near polling areas created unease. “A friend said that at times so many candidates were around the polling booths that it created a sense of fear amongst the students,” one student reported. Several students also mocked the dramatics of campaign appeals. Students allege that Aryan Maan was near the Miranda House campus and kept approaching students by saying, “aap sabhi behene ho meri isliye bol raha hu votes ke liye.” These accounts suggest that what is framed as democratic engagement often feels like pressure, even surveillance.

Credibility further erodes incentives to participate. “It’s a waste of time for me to put my safety and security at risk, travel for two hours, and wait for another three hours, to cast one vote when I know no tangible change will come out of it,” one student complained. Another added: “Har saal wohi posters, promises, rallies; result toh pehle se decided lagta hai.” Ongoing legal challenges to the election process, including petitions around EVM integrity, reinforce these doubts.

If students perceive the institution as structurally exclusionary, procedurally unsafe, and substantively captured by dominant parties, their withdrawal is not apathy but a rational response. Turnout rose this year, likely due to mobilisation by major political outfits rather than restored trust.

Until questions of safety, accessibility, and credibility are addressed, DUSU’s symbolic prominence will remain unmatched by genuine representativeness.



Image Credits: Times of India 

Image Caption: Who does the DUSU really represent?

Sakshi Singh 

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
Campus Central

The Diminishing State of Student Politics in India

By

 

Every year DUSU elections are greeted by much pomp and circumstance. From the beginning of the new academic year to the day of results, it is impossible to escape the crowds, the white paper slips, and the sounds of the world’s largest student body electing its representatives. However, in India’s major state universities, this exercise in democracy is nowhere to be seen.

 

In 2006, Lucknow University – one of the oldest state universities of Uttar Pradesh – suspended student elections citing incidents of violence, and the recommendations of the Lyngdoh Committee, which was created to ensure transparent and systematic student elections. Since then, no elections to the students’ union have taken place, despite demands and demonstrations by students. 

 

This is not a unique case as students of colleges and universities, both at the state and central level, report fresh cases of suspensions and delays of student union elections coming in every day.

 

Earlier this year in West Bengal’s Jadavpur and Presidency University campuses, student groups staged protests demanding elections to the students’ union, which have not been conducted since 2017. Similar problems of student representation persist in Tamil Nadu politics. 

 

Without official status as representatives, student groups still stage protests and raise student demands but the effectiveness of such efforts remains questionable. Without elected representatives, it becomes easier for Universities to dismiss even the valid and justifiable grievances and concerns of students as acts of provocation or aggression. Any dialogue between students and the administration becomes challenging. The lack of accountability has left students feeling disempowered.

 

In many cases, the elected student union has been replaced by an appointed or indirectly elected council, in a process  alleged to be full of biases and corrupt practices.

 

Not just University authorities, but state governments have not been very supportive of students’ unions. In 2023, Ashok Gehlot-led Congress government of Rajasthan was criticised for not holding student union elections in that academic session, due to concerns of ‘money and muscle power’, in a move which was protested by student groups including the Congress student wing NSUI. 

 

The Gujarat government has also been criticised for the ‘Gujarat Common Universities Act’, which allegedly seeks to end student politics on campus by concentrating the powers of administration of universities in the hands of the state government.

 

In the face of the diminishing state of student politics in India, the emphasis on DUSU elections is very significant, yet the prevalent freebie culture, funneling of resources by respective political parties and lack of productive political discourse on campus paints a distressing picture for the future of student politics.

 

For better or for worse, the union elections at Delhi University are more about visibility; the competition between the four major student organisations and by extension, their parent organisations. From the colourful banners, to the sloganeering, to the displays of financial and political power and influence in the form of pizza parties and Lamborghinis parked outside colleges, student elections have been reduced to a spectacle. Students today often vote along ideological lines, but in the noise of student elections, campaign manifestos and promises are buried beneath mountains of ballot slips. Voting becomes less about what candidates represent and more about simply remembering who they are.

 

Universities often tend to express worries over student protests being taken over by ‘outside elements’ and have cited that as a reason to dismiss student unions, but the issues of policies which are purely decorative and leaders nowhere to be seen post-elections already inundate the most prominent unions. Others are still fighting for their share of democracy.

 

Image Credits: Divyanshi for DU Beat

 

Mangalya Singh

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
DU History

DUSU: A Remembrance of Things Past

By

From its establishment in 1949 to first elections in 1954, the Delhi University Students’ Union has had a long run, one that preceded India’s Independence and saw the rise and fall of multiple governments in its lifetime. 

 

It has become difficult to discern the notion of student politics at any level in India without mentioning the inception of the country’s biggest Student’s Union, DUSU. Seven lakh students, ninety-one colleges and a run of over seventy years: the Delhi University Students’ Union has had a legacy that continues to define and re-define student elections and politics in India.

 

Late historian and professor, Aparna Basu, in her book, University of Delhi (1922-1997) details the formation of the body politic of the university at a time when quiet rebellion against British Raj was brewing, alongside a surge of student-led activities. It becomes imperative to note that the opposition to colonial rule worked in tandem with student demands for a space where they could air out concerns in relation to administration, education and other issues in relation to DU on democratic terms. It all began in the same year India got Independence—1947.

 

Students across colleges under the University had been raising demands for a Union that catered specifically to the needs of DU students, a task into which discussion was initiated by the–then Head of DU’s Economics Department, VKRV Rao. A provisional committee consisting of presidents of all unions across colleges was set, following the undertaking of a general meeting with an advisory board. Two years after, in 1949, the Delhi University Students’ Union was inaugurated by the–then Prime Minister, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and was inculcated into the University. 

 

DUSU’s origin story can be traced back to a few years prior, when in 1942, during the Quit India Movement, students from colleges of North Campus like Hindu, St. Stephen’s and Indraprastha went from college-to-college encouraging students to participate in protests for liberating Congress leaders who had been jailed previously.

 

The students then went down the road adjacent to Chandni Chowk, shouting slogans and organizing protests the records of which can only be found in resources like Basu’s book. The Union was the product of a multitude of college students across the DU circuit coming together to champion the quest for a platform that was for the students, by the students and of the students. 

 

As the years passed by, DUSU had made contributions to some of India’s biggest political movements, demonstrating participation in the Jayaprakash Narayan Movement that originated in Bihar in 1974, as well as the imposition of the Emergency under Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in 1975.

 

The Union has four office bearers officially: President, Vice President, Secretary and Joint-Secretary, all of which can be contested for by student organizations across the college circuit. Positions are elected individually, which means that members that make up the Union need not be from the same political affiliation. It can be said that DUSU exist as a microcosm of majoritarian politics in India, given that some of the biggest names in the game, Akhil Bharatiya Vishwa Parishad (ABVP) and National Students’ Union of India (NSUI) are affiliated with political parties (the Bharatiya Janta Party and the Indian National Congress respectively) that have held office at different times and have defined the political landscape of India we see  today. In all of DUSU’s recorded history, with the exception of one candidate (Manoj Choudhary, who held the seat from 2009-2010 and contested as an independent candidate), all student-elected Presidents belonged to either of the two organizations. ABVP candidates have been elected President nine times more than NSUI candidates, a testament to the party’s legacy as the largest student organization in the world, having over a fifty-five lakh membership count.

 

This is not to say that student parties are partial to majoritarian politics. Left-leaning parties like All India Students’ Association (AISA), which works in association with the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) have made waves in the landscape of student activism in India. Though their popularity amongst students of the University has been largely clipped, and cannot rival the widespread acclaim they have gathered in similar institutions like Jawaharlal Nehru University, left parties have played an integral role in taking up issues that have drowned under the flashy displays of money and muscle power.

 

While student leadership in India did not begin with DUSU alone, it continues to remain one of the most longstanding and successful examples of it. As Delhi University’s official website puts it, “In the past, several of the official bearers of Delhi University Students’ Union have gone on to hold public offices in State and Central Governments.” Some of the biggest names in DUSU have gone on spearheading a similar route in Indian politics, including the late Arun Jaitley, who served as India’s Minister of Finance and Corporate Affairs from 2014 to 2019.

 

While pursuing his bachelor’s in Commerce at SRCC, Jaitley was elected President of the Delhi University Students’ Union (1974–75) and it was under his informal leadership that DUSU made the shift from indirect to direct elections through an agitation that lasted almost fifty days. Between 1972 and 1973; the University was shut down without a formal day of re-opening, and administration settled on allowing all students from colleges affiliated with DU to participate in voting directly for their leaders. Jaitley, the-then President of his college’s Students’ Union was pivoted into stardom after being one of the few familiar faces who led the crowd, and ABVP made a clean sweep across all contesting positions in the elections held in the following year. Jaitley was elected DUSU President.

 

The Delhi University Students’ Union has had a legacy that stretches far beyond the divisions of the multi-party system that it took from the country’s election system. It is not merely a topic of discussion for students enrolled in one of DU’s colleges, but a multi-tier apparatus that exists as a larger reflection of the timelessness of student activism, student politics and student leadership in India. 

 

Image Credit: Hindustan Times

Image Caption: Former DUSU President Arun Jaitley, as seen post-1974 win

Aastha Singh
[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
DUB Speak

More Students Voted, More Said “No” 

By

The 2025 DUSU elections showed a striking paradox: voter turnout increased, while NOTA captured over 23,000 ballots. Together, these trends reveal a student body eager to participate in democracy yet frustrated with the choices offered.

The Delhi University Students’ Union (DUSU) elections this year told two very different stories simultaneously. On one hand, Turnout this year stood at 39.45% , a clear jump from the 30–35 % range of the past few years. On the other, thousands of them also pressed the “None of the Above” (NOTA) button, choosing to reject every candidate on the ballot. Put together, these numbers show us a student body that is more active but also more dissatisfied with the choices in front of it.

Many credit this rise of turnout to the “Clean Elections” effect. After the Delhi High Court pulled up DUSU candidates last year for their excessive defecation, this election was much more regulated. For many first-year students, this made the whole process worth engaging with. 

However, many also used their vote to say no to everyone. NOTA polled over 23,000 votes across the four central panel posts—around ten per cent of all votes cast which is significantly higher than last year’s. 

 

Post NOTA Votes Percentage of Total Votes Polled (Approx.)
President 3,175 5.3%
Vice President 5,820 9.7%
Secretary 7,365 12.3%
Joint Secretary 7,314 12.2%
Total Across 4 Posts 23,674 ~10% of total votes polled

 

Why did so many students go this way? For one, the reputation of DUSU elections as contests dominated by money and power still lingers, even if this year looked cleaner. For another, there’s frustration with the limited choice. The ABVP–NSUI rivalry has long dominated the union. 

This leaves us with a paradox. Students are more engaged: they are turning up to vote in bigger numbers—but they are also more critical, and less willing to settle.

 

Picture Credits: Anjali P for DU Beat

Juhi Bansal

[email protected]

Keep Reading
By
Features

Taking off the Blindfold : Uncovering Caste in DUSU

By

The politics of our country has long been shaped by caste arithmetic. DUSU politics could have been a model of issue-based politics but, even today, its elections are swung by the “caste lobby”.

To me, the most attractive thing about DU’s red brick walls used to be their political spirit. Debates at tapris, protests against administrations, and the feeling that there I could touch and feel politics was what defined DU for me. I once imagined student politics as an accessible space. A space where any student, regardless of background, could speak, contest, and belong.
That imagination was built on the hope that education and democracy could dissolve social hierarchies, and that Delhi University, with its national reputation could be a rare equaliser. That utopian vision perhaps came from DU’s reputation as a cosmopolitan university—a gathering  of bright young minds from across the country. In some sense, it is cosmopolitan. However, its student union is anything but.

The Delhi University Students’ Union (DUSU) has become a mirror of the worst in Indian politics. It is a space where the caste arithmetic dictates tickets, campaigns, and results.DU’s campuses draw their student demographic heavily from Haryana, western Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand, and the political fibres of those states replicate themselves on campus. The student wings of the RSS (ABVP) and Congress (NSUI) end up mimicking the caste blocks of their parent parties. The Jat community, for instance—an influential agrarian group forming roughly a quarter of Haryana’s population—has long dominated the state’s politics. The 2016 Jat reservation agitation, which paralysed Haryana for days, showed us just how decisive their mobilisation could be. Since then, both BJP and Congress have carefully calibrated tickets along the “Jats versus others” divide. This same arithmetic plays out in DUSU, where tickets rarely ever go outside Jat and Gujjar groups.

On paper, it may seem that this student election is free for anyone interested. But to fight a DUSU election with any reasonable chance of winning requires resources, and resources have always been controlled by a few groups. Networks of village associations, PG landlords, shopkeepers, and alumni associations directly transform this caste mobilisation straight into votes. As per policy, DU has a 22.5% reservation for students belonging to Scheduled
Castes and Tribes (SC – 15% and ST – 7.5% interchangeably), a policy that frequently comes under fire from supporters of “meritocracy”.

It’s worth asking then why our student politics remains firmly in the grip of dominant castes. Not once in its history has DUSU elected a Dalit or Adivasi president. The post has always gone to Jats, Brahmins, and other dominant communities. In the last two decades especially, Jat dominance has been near- total, perhaps a spillover of their post- 2016 political assertion.

In a student election as important as DUSU, where campus news makes national headlines, representation matters. Almost every DUSU office- bearer goes on to a career in mainstream politics, and the exposure and connections it offers are invaluable. That Dalit and Adivasi students—despite being present in significant numbers—are systematically excluded from leadership is evidence of the glaring social and resource gaps that remain.

The knowledge of the overpowering sway of caste politics on DUSU has become almost banal. During the 2025 campaign, rebel candidate Umanshi Lamba told Dilli Tak that Joslyn Nandita Choudhary “isn’t a Jat, nor…a Gujjar…[and yet] she got the ticket on Jat lobbying, but now is saying she is a Gujjar. I am a Jat.”

The interviewer further continued on this line of questioning asking, “Aryan Maan is a strong Jat candidate, and you are a female and a Jat, how come you did not get the ticket?”The fact that such statements can be made openly, in 2025, inside one of India’s premier universities, says it all. DU is meant to be a representation of the brightest, most intelligent minds of India. What does it say of our character that the brightest kinds of our country are only as powerful as their background allows them to be?

The share won this year by SFI-AISA’s Abhinandana Pratyashi suggests students are not only voting along caste lines. Perhaps it was her strength as a candidate, perhaps a new appetite for issue-based politics. I used to find it inspiring to hear parties talk of menstrual leave, scrapping SEC/VAC, or defending student rights. But the politics of marginalisation, of equality, of an end to the caste system, doesn’t seem to carry much weight.`DUSU should have been a space of cross-state unity and collaboration, a place where the most marginalised voices of our student body could take centre stage. Instead, it has been reduced to a microcosm of India’s ugliest politics. Until caste dominance is broken here, DU cannot claim to represent the future of India.

Perhaps this is the sobering truth we must face: the very students who are supposed to create a more equal tomorrow have become complicit in a tragically unequal system. If our leaders here believe that this exclusion is natural, then we shouldn’t be surprised when the same logic echoes in Parliament.

 

 

Image Credits: Manan for DU Beat

Anjali Paruvu
[email protected]

Keep Reading
By