In the first 24 hours after Delhi University activated its CSAS phase 1 portal, 41,473 students registered for undergraduate admission for the 2026-27 academic session. The university is expected to fill approximately 71,600 seats this admission cycle.
Delhi University has started the Phase 1 of the undergraduate admissions under the Common Seat Allocation System (CSAS UG-2026) for the academic year 2026-27 on 27th June 2026. According to officials, the portal has received over 41,473 unique registrations on the first day.
One of the most sought after universities in the country, it provides 71,600 UG seats across 73 programmes and 100 BA programme combinations in various streams of studies under different faculties, namely Arts, Applied Social Sciences & Humanities, Education, Interdisciplinary & Applied Sciences, Music, Commerce & Business Studies, Mathematical Sciences, Sciences and Social Sciences. For the academic year 2026-27, admission to all UG programmes of all the colleges of UoD will be done on the basis of Common University Entrance Test (Undergraduate) – 2026 (CUET-UG–2026) only. The eligibility criteria of specific programmes and procedures involving the admission process is specified in the Undergraduate Bulletin of Information–2026 (BoI(UG)-2026) available on the admission of the University (admission.uod.ac.in).
The CSAS-UG works in three stages. First you have to register; this is Phase 1. Then you have to fill in your preferences for programmes and colleges; this is Phase 2. Finally, you get to know which seat you have been allocated; this is Phase 3. You have to complete each stage to be able to go to the next one. Missing the registration deadline disqualifies a candidate from subsequent rounds. The university has stated that some Phase 2 and Phase 3 dates remain provisional and subject to confirmation via the admission portal.
Phase 1 of CSAS involves registering and providing academic information. Candidates also need to upload documents for verification. The first phase of the CSAS works with API Setu. API Setu is a central government platform that helps exchange data. The platform allows the university to verify candidate information, including CUET scores and academic records, directly from source databases rather than through manually uploaded certificates.
Phase 1 registration for the current cycle remains open, with the university directing candidates to its admission portal and registered email addresses for further communication regarding the schedule for Phase 2 and Phase 3. Seat allocation will be carried out based on CUET scores, programme-specific eligibility, reservation policies and the preferences filled by candidates.
The university has also announced that the new academic session will commence on July 21, provided the admission schedule progresses as planned.
By challenging traditional binary norms, gender-fluid fashion has become a powerful form of self-expression. From the rock style of the Rolling Stones to Harry Styles’ Vogue cover and the Met Gala’s “Camp” theme, the boundaries between menswear and womenswear continue to blur. Rooted in LGBTQ+ history, non-binary activism, and changing cultural attitudes, fashion is steadily redefining what self-expression can look like.
“Slightly peaked shoulder jacket, ruffled blouse, and stacked heel boots”
Can you recall which heroine rocked this look on stage?
Chances are, you can’t, because it wasn’t a heroine at all! It was the famous American singer-songwriter Prince (Prince Rogers Nelson) in the iconic ‘Purple Rain’ video. Which leaves us wondering, does clothing really have to be gendered? Are beliefs such as “blue for the boys and pink for the girls” natural, or are they constructed carefully by society to help us pigeonhole ourselves, unconsciously pushing our creativity into a prison of “log kya kahenge?”
Prince challenged gender norms through his bold fashion choices.
When we think about fashion, we often associate it with creativity and individuality. Yet, when it comes to gender expression, these ideals tend to disappear. For the queer community, fashion has long been a form of self-expression, resistance, and communication. By challenging the traditional male/female binary, genderqueer fashion pushes us to rethink why we assign gender to clothing in the first place.
“Genderqueer fashion represents the avant-garde of contemporary fashion,” says Bliss Foster, a millennial fashion critic. Unfortunately, it continues to face boundaries that dictate what men and women are “supposed” to wear.
Stereotypes, especially gender stereotypes, box an individual’s choices into socially acceptable norms, discouraging them from experimenting. A common example is the normalisation of the colours blue and pink for boys and girls, which can often lead to discrimination among young children.
Clothing, as one of our primary forms of visual communication, is deeply rooted in this traditional gender binary. Cultural stereotypes associate masculinity with utility, power, and rationality, while femininity is associated with decoration and frivolity, creating rigid fashion norms that influence how people dress. True genderqueer fashion seeks to disrupt this by incorporating elements traditionally associated with femininity into masculine clothing, thereby challenging the stereotype.
The fashion industry and queer community have never been alien to each other. Fashion has long served as a tool for expressing queer identities, including those of non-binary individuals. Shaun Cole’s “Dandies: Fashion and Finesse in Art and Culture” and Elizabeth Wilson’s “Adorned in Dreams: Fashion and Modernity” have examined the intertwined history of queer aesthetics and fashion’s role in expressing and exploring sexuality and gender.
Queer fashion has a much longer history than most people realise. The deconstruction of gender stereotypes regarding clothing started around the 1920s when pants for women began to be tolerated in sports and some limited activities such as cycling and horse riding. The rising wave of gender politics and the sexual revolution dates back to the 1960s, which was swiftly followed by the 1970s era where questions regarding gender stereotypes were seriously raised, dismantling those stereotypes gradually in the process.
The Disco era helped bring gender-fluid fashion and bold self-expression into the mainstream.
As feminist and gay rights movements gained momentum, the fashion industry reacted to these movements. Alongside these movements, popular culture also played an important role. David Bowie helped introduce gender fluidity into mainstream fashion, while the Disco era familiarised these ideas amongst the masses. Prince is also considered an LGBTQ+ icon to this day for defying gender stereotypes and pushing the boundaries of sexuality. For his admirers at that time, his difference and willingness to transgress boundaries made him stand out.
Similarly, and even slightly beforehand, The Rolling Stones used their own rock style to experiment with fashion and its boundaries, often choosing to wear colourful jumpsuits and ruffled shirts. Along with this, documented examples from the punk movement and the reintroduction of men’s skirts or divided skirts by the Japanese deconstructionist designers have also had their part in de-gendering fashion around the world. It was during this time when we saw the rise of trans and non-binary activists calling for gender-neutral fashion not only as a fashionable renaissance but also as an “anti-violence imperative”.
In recent years, we have witnessed a significant rise in acceptance of fashion that goes beyond the scope of gender binary. This progressive approach has allowed generations of people to express themselves and their identities more freely, most visibly through art, music, and, importantly, fashion.
From David Bowie to Harry Styles, the landscape of gender and how we perceive it in the world of fashion is changing drastically. Stereotypes are being gradually eradicated as consumers bother less about standard gender labels and adopt a more fluid approach to individual expression.
Harry Styles’ 2020 Vogue cover that sparked conversations about fashion and identity.David Bowie performs on stage in a glitter striped jumpsuit.
In 2016, actor and musician Jaden Smith could be seen participating in a Louis Vuitton campaign showcasing their newest collection. In this campaign he can be seen wearing a skirt whilst posing with other female models in similar outfits. Not long after that, Harry Styles featured on the cover of Vogue in 2020 in a pale blue, lace-trimmed dress underneath a black tuxedo jacket, both by Gucci. However, there was significant backlash for both, raising controversies around gender-related concepts (especially masculinity) and whether events like these fell under the umbrella of men appropriating women’s clothing.
While these examples were still perceived with scepticism among older millennials, what does Gen Z say about all this? Gen Z has introduced a unique set of consumer behaviours due to their digital inclination and favouring fast, seamless experiences. Moreover, keeping in mind their high levels of acceptance, these young consumers are ditching old labels and finding new ways to express themselves outside of typical gender norms. They are arguably the most diverse generation yet, as they are also far more comfortable with shifting views of identity than older generations have been.
The year 2019 was particularly important for de-gendering fashion and the rise of acceptance for fashion that stands out of the box. Be it the 2019 Vogue’s annual Met Gala theme or the #DeGenderFashion that gained traction and eventually turned into a social movement, the year was revolutionary for fashion and gender identity, especially for Gen Z.
In 2019, the Met Gala theme was chosen to be ‘Camp: Notes on Fashion’, which not only went beyond the convention but also provided the attendees with extravagant creative freedom regarding their fashion choices. This particular year was a chance for celebrities to push the boundaries of the binary and try pieces they perhaps would normally shy away from. Looking specifically at the male attendees, many chose to incorporate sequins and glitter into their looks, embracing an exaggerated version of their typical outfit choices.
Another notable moment was the “Clothes Have No Gender” talk delivered by the gender non-conforming activist, performer, and writer Alok Vaid-Menon at the Business of Fashion (#BoFVoices) stage. This later gave rise to #DeGenderFashion, which took the shape of a social movement. In that talk, they called for a complete de-gendering of the fashion and beauty industries, noting that “any article of clothing should be for anyone who wants to wear it, regardless of their gender.”
Alok Vaid-Menon champions the idea that clothes have no gender, advocating for a more inclusive fashion industry.
The idea of menswear and womenswear has been gradually eroding in recent years, giving much more room for individuality. People are no longer restricting themselves to the clothing limitations of their own gender but instead feeling free to express themselves however they choose. This has allowed the fashion industry to evolve, with many designers creating unisex and fluid collections with high-street brands following suit.
As this evolution continues, scholars such as Connell and Messerschmidt, argue that society has the capacity to deconstruct gender binaries and criticise hegemonic masculinity, encouraging brands to be more diverse and portray accurate representations of consumers. As emerging generations reject rigid gender standards, the fashion industry must adapt. It should strive to create a place where customers can take control of their bodies and accept their identities, regardless of appearance.
Ultimately, fashion has always been more than just clothing; it is a reflection of identity, culture, and self-expression. Every generation grows up with its own set of norms regarding who should wear what, only to challenge them again. Perhaps the true legacy of gender-fluid fashion lies in reminding us that the gender binary was drawn by people in the first place. And if it was drawn, it can be redrawn.
Kamla Nehru College has been recognised as the first ‘Zero-Waste Institution’ under the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2026, marking an important step toward sustainable campus practices.
The college’s programme, titled Awareness on Zero-Waste Management Practices, began with the ceremonial lighting of the lamp, followed by an address from the Principal, Prof. Pavitra Bhardwaj. Addressing the gathering, she reflected on KNC’s journey since its establishment in 1964 and stated that the college remained committed to maintaining an eco-friendly campus. She also highlighted the role of the college’s Solid Liquid Resource Management (SLRM) Committee, which works in collaboration with the MCD to facilitate sustainable waste management practices.
The programme was also attended by Dr Rajiv Nayan, Assistant Commissioner, Central Zone, MCD, and Shammi Talwar, Brand Ambassador for the MCD’s Swachh Survekshan campaign. Talwar pointed to the growing problem of waste accumulation in the city and emphasised that waste segregation and proper disposal must begin at the source, including within individual households.
In his address, Chief Guest Shashwat Saurabh laid particular emphasis on collective action in tackling waste management, highlighting the importance of public participation in addressing the issue. He also commended the efforts of the MCD’s sanitation workers and urged students to fulfil their civic responsibilities.
Speaking to DU Beat, the President of KNC’s Student Council, Rajeshwari Shelke, said,
I feel immensely proud that Kamala Nehru College has been recognised as a Zero-Waste Institution. This achievement reflects the dedication of our students and the unwavering commitment of the college towards sustainability. Together, we’ve created a campus where responsible choices inspire lasting change.”
The programme concluded with a skit performed by members of the college’s SLRM Committee, highlighting the importance of effective waste management. The Chief Guest then distributed participation certificates to the students before presenting the Principal with the ‘Zero-Waste Institution’ certificate.
Delhi University secured a global rank of 322 in the QS World University Rankings 2027, up from 328 last year, with significant improvements in research citations and sustainability.
The Delhi University has climbed six places in the QS World University Rankings 2027, securing a global rank of 322 compared to 328 in the previous edition. The university has also retained its position as India’s highest-ranked public university and remains seventh overall among all higher education institutions in the country.
The QS World University Rankings 2027 evaluated 8,808 institutions worldwide, with 1,504 universities from 106 countries and territories making the final list. Among the 52 Indian institutions featured, Delhi University has continued to strengthen its standing at both the national and international levels.
While the six-place rise in the overall rankings is noteworthy, the most significant improvement came in Citations per Faculty, where DU jumped 85 places globally, from 403rd to 318th. This reflects the growing quality, visibility, and impact of the university’s research output. As this metric typically changes gradually, such a substantial rise in a single edition is particularly significant.
The university also recorded notable progress in sustainability, climbing 57 places from 297th to 240th globally. Its Employer Reputation ranking improved by 15 positions, rising from 319th to 304th. DU’s overall score increased from 42.6 in the 2026 rankings to 43.8 in the 2027 edition. Among Indian institutions, Delhi University ranked second in Employment Outcomes, fourth in Sustainability (up from sixth in 2026), fourth in International Research Network, and sixth in Academic Reputation, maintaining its position in the latter category from the previous year.
One indicator that remained unchanged was Academic Reputation, where Delhi University continues to rank sixth among Indian universities. This metric reflects how academics assess the quality of teaching and research at an institution.
The rise in our global standing, along with the university’s position among India’s leading institutions, demonstrates the strength of our academic ecosystem and our commitment to excellence in teaching, research, innovation, sustainability, and societal engagement.
Delhi University has announced the second round of PG seat allocations under CSAS-PG 2026. Candidates must accept the allotted seats by June 24, while fee payment remains open until June 27.
DU is conducting admissions to postgraduate programmes for the 2026-27 academic session on the basis of scores obtained in the Common University Entrance Test (Postgraduate), or CUET-PG. The university allocates seats based on candidates’ entrance examination scores, programme preferences, and seat availability through the Common Seat Allocation System for Post-graduate Programmes [CSAS-PG].
According to an official notice issued by the University of Delhi Admission Branch, the second round of seat allocation results for post-graduate admissions has been released. As per the admission schedule, applicants who accept their allotted seats will be able to pay the admission fee until June 27. The second round of allocations was announced on June 22, hence continuing the ongoing postgraduate admission process.
The university has made 2964 fresh allocations across various postgraduate programmes during the second round. Alongside the allocation list, DU has also released programme-wise minimum allocation scores for candidates. Candidates can log in using their credentials to view their allotment status and complete the required admission formalities within the given time. Admission data released by the university indicates significant participation in the first round of admissions, with over 8,000 candidates completing the process by paying the prescribed fees. Though several students have opted for upgradation in subsequent rounds, others have chosen to retain their allotted seats.
As the second round is underway, candidates are advised to check their allotment status carefully and complete all the required admission formalities within the stipulated time. Failure to meet the deadlines for seat acceptance or fee payment may result in the cancellation of the allotted seat
Students should regularly monitor official university notifications through the admission portal and the CSAS-PG portal for updates regarding future allocation rounds, upgrades, and admission-related announcements. The postgraduate admission process is expected to continue through additional rounds of allocation based on seat availability and candidate preferences.
The care economy is the most foundational ingredient of a resilient economy. Where then, is the recognition?
The sound of my childhood is many things. It’s waking up to an auntie aggressively sweeping the floor, knocking things over as she makes her way through the room and haphazardly putting them back. It’s the sound of the pressure cooker, the tawa sizzling, the tandoor crackling away as sweet potatoes bathe in the heat of the coal. In almost every way, the sound of every average Indian child is also the silent one of compliance, to the system that is brazen in its onerous ways, to the family that unknowingly falls victim to this system, and the realisation that eventually accompanies it.
Compliance, in this context, is borne from the sentiment that really has no viable response, no widely feasible solution, except a few, but that discussion will perhaps be better suited for the latter part of this piece. “Agar main nahi karungi, toh kaun karega? (If I don’t do it, who will?)” That is exactly why the question of how to include the care economy into traditional economic activities has left economists hanging. It’s because care is elusive; the methodological fundamentalism of any study that involves the economy or the economic being requires that the rationality assumption be fulfilled. This is where the concept of the ‘rational economic man’ comes into the picture, and why the care economy fundamentally cannot function within a historically orthodox mainstream or neoclassical framework, because care itself isn’t driven by rationality in any sense. Love, concern, responsibility, and obligation may motivate care work, but rationality may neither be achievable nor conceivable as an option for most care workers. If it were so, most mothers, domestic workers, and home nurses would not be doing what they are, and instead engage in economic activities that are traditionally more ‘productive’.
The important point to consider here is that the care economy is absolutely essential. Of course, this is a historically recognised fact, but it cannot be ignored that certain sections of society must bear the burden of not only providing care work, but having it remain hidden, unrecognised, and as a service existing in perpetuity. This is where the issue lies. First of all, by restricting endless aspirations, individual nuances and souls behind the obligation of care–without which the economy would falter completely, there remains no real possibility of redistribution. The heteronormative structure that divides familial responsibility is efficient, and is definitely rational, but whether it is equitable, or even realistic in the humanistic sense, is the question we must ask ourselves. Secondly, we all have heard non-participants in the care economy singing praises of those who function under it. What they do is selfless, they say, the hallmark of a good, responsible caretaker and person; they are just as they should be, there is no other place for them to exist in. All of this is an illusion to distract from the reality of the situation, the fact that as soon as there are people performing obligatory economic activities with no true compensation (except perhaps the validation of those they care for, or maybe society) or a wage of any kind, it reduces their bargaining power almost to oblivion. They become passive participants in the political and economic diaspora of their environment and, in a way, displace the control over their own fate.
In India, especially, once we consider care and extended care activities that the classical economic models generally ignore, the labour force participation rate for females (in the heteronormative structure) increases dramatically, three or four- fold in comparison to when they are not included. What this means is that there is a particularly large chunk of society in the country right now, which is moving from working in a recognisable space where there is formal compensation, to unpaid, unrecognised work. Isn’t that deeply concerning?
This is a complex situation to resolve because creating a distributive care economy would, firstly, require an overturning of generations of psychosocial training, and secondly, entail authorities to acknowledge that there is even a requirement to overturn a system that fundamentally operates in their favour. When care work is outsourced, as many Indian households do, it creates a supply chain that leads to the same outcome for another individual. For example, if a domestic helper is paid to cook and clean for a particular household, they would not have enough time to do the same at home. It is then likely that, if they have the means to, they outsource their care work as well (or train future care workers within the family) or exist in a perpetual state of “time poverty”. There simply isn’t enough time to work, to care for children or elderly family members, and to care for the house as a whole, while still caring for oneself. The most important thing that gets lost here is recognizability, monetary and otherwise, and there must be a way to regain it. Perhaps, it is otherwise false to claim that we enjoy a democratic setup when so many people aren’t even given space to exist within it.
Image credits: Carlin, a Peruvian political cartoonist
Raising concerns regarding repeated infrastructure-related incidents across campuses, students of the University of Delhi organised a protest at the Faculty of Arts.
Students of the University of Delhi staged a protest at the Faculty of Arts earlier this week over alleged negligence regarding campus infrastructure and student safety. NSUI member Gopal Choudhary reportedly led the demonstration. Students raised concerns over a series of infrastructure-related incidents reported across various colleges and departments under the university.
Demonstrators demanded immediate structural safety audits of university buildings, urgent repair work in deteriorating facilities, and greater administrative accountability regarding campus safety measures.
Following the protests and growing concerns regarding campus infrastructure, the Delhi University administration has now reportedly instructed colleges and departments to conduct proper structural and electrical safety inspections across campuses. However, there is no official statement from the University administration regarding this decision.
Among the demands raised during the protest was the provision of life insurance and compensation support for students injured in infrastructure failures within university premises. Protesters also called upon the administration to publicly address recent incidents and implement preventive measures to avoid similar occurrences in the future.
In an interview with the Editorial Team of DU Beat, Gopal mentioned,
We have given the administration of DU an ultimatum of 21 days. During this time, we want them to conduct thorough inspection of all DU colleges and suspend classes as well as exams in campuses with poor infrastructure. Otherwise we will again stage a hunger strike until stricter actions are taken. We are also planning to file a RTI in 1-2 days time for how the annual budget is spent in every college. When we approached the administration of DU, they pointed us towards the individual colleges. And the admin in the colleges pointed us back to the VC. There is no end to this cycle and both of them are equally responsible. At the end they’ll have to work together if change is desired.
Other than that, we are protesting for water coolers and ORS facilities in every classroom during the exam season in light of the prevalent heatwave. In addition to this, the 66.67% attendance criteria is also problematic. I will be attending a meeting on Monday with the administration to address these concerns.”
Slogans such as “DU Campus or Danger Zone” and “Have we come here to study or die?” were seen on placards and raised during the demonstration, reflecting concerns among students regarding safety conditions on campus.
The protest follows a recent incident reported at the Department of Botany, Faculty of Science, on 4 May 2026 during an ongoing MSc practical examination. According to statements circulated online, the false ceiling of Lab Room No. 26 allegedly collapsed between 3:45 and 4:00 PM, along with a projector and nearby panels, while students were writing their examination.
One student reportedly sustained a severe head injury requiring several stitches and was taken to a nearby hospital in Civil Lines. Another student allegedly suffered minor shoulder injuries. The incident prompted renewed discussion among students regarding the structural condition of university buildings and the response mechanisms available during emergencies.
Visuals from the protest showed students assembled with placards and banners outside the Faculty of Arts premises, with slogans reportedly focusing on student safety and institutional accountability. Protesters alleged that multiple warnings and complaints regarding infrastructure conditions had previously been raised across colleges.
After many drafts and meetings the final date sheet was uploaded, changing the examination dates for Semester 6th and 8th students. This comes after the final date for filling the examination form with late fee passed on the 7th of May.
On 7th May, between 7:18PM and 7:25PM, the examination date sheet got updated by Delhi University, changing the exam dates for Semester 6 and 8 students. This change came a few hours before the last time students of regular, NCWEB (Non-Collegiate Women’s Education Board), and SOL (School of Open Learning) could fill up the examination form with late fees.
The final date sheet has preponed the exams for 6th and 8th semester. Exams will now take place earlier. As an example, previously DSE exams for semester 8 were to be conducted on 18th May, 15th, 17th and 18th of June respectively but now it will be conducted on the 18th and 20th May, and 7th and 14th June,2026. Similarly, many semester 6 exams are now pre-poned to end by the 4th of June.
Many final semester students had complained about the month-long gap between exams and wished for their exams to get concluded timely without huge gaps due to job opportunities and admission deadlines. Rahul Jhansla, Vice President of DUSU, had submitted a written application to the Dean of Student Welfare regarding the DU examination date sheet for the aforementioned reasons.
According to Rahul Jhansla, the DU administration had kept the initial gap in consideration for the UPSC prelims; however, they later stated that they would speak to the Controller of Examinations to reduce the gap in the later period.
The examination notice released on 4th May further announced that students currently in their 6th semester could opt for exiting in the SLC portal in June or July, instead of choosing to pursue the additional 4th Year added by the NEP 2020.
Students are advised to check their admit cards for the May-June 2026 examination, which is live on the SLC portal. Many students have also reported that their admit cards show ‘EXTCR” on the column ‘paper type’ causing further confusion. However, they have been informed by teachers that it will not be an issue if it continues to show even after the correction.
Even though the final date sheet has now been released, many students have expressed frustration at the constantly changing date sheet since it disrupts plans for studying and travelling back home. It also highlights poor planning and lack of communication on the University’s behalf as many students continue to question whether or not this shall be the final timetable, despite the official notice.
On 30th April, Hansraj College issued a notice terminating the suspensions of 29 out of 30 students; however, Parth Srivastava’s suspension remains in effect. He has approached the High Court of Delhi under Article 226 and has argued that the suspension violates Parth’s fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(a), and 21 of the Constitution.
Hansraj College terminated the suspension of 29 out of 30 students who were suspended due to alleged defamation, violence, indiscipline and misconduct, which had occurred after the college fest, Confluence 2026. However, one student, Parth Srivastava, the former president of the student union of Hansraj College, is still suspended, and the matter has reached the High Court of Delhi.
However, Parth Srivastava is still suspended and has filed a petition to the Delhi High Court challenging his suspension on multiple grounds, including “defaming the college through social media platforms” and using “derogatory language.”
On 29th April, Justice Jasmeet Singh issued a notice which allowed Parth Srivastava to enter the campus to fill his examination form as the last date was on 30th April. The notice also stated that the petitioner will not cause any disruption in the college. But he wasn’t allowed to attend his farewell.
Parth Srivastava in conversation with DU Beat
He told DU Beat,
“The person who gave all of his four years to the college and its students was specifically not allowed to attend his own farewell through explicit instructions mentioned in the notice/poster. It was truly very disheartening and shattering for me.”
Filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, pleas that his suspension, which was declared on 20th April, be squashed. In a report by Newslaundry, “[t]he petition argues that the suspension violates Parth’s fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(a), and 21 of the Constitution–the rights to equality, free speech, and life and dignity.” It has also challenged the legitimacy of the Special Core Sub-Discipline Committee, which suspended him.
The petition also seeks to restore all the academic benefits throughout the suspension period and ensure the petitioner is permitted to attend all classes, participate in academic activities, and continue his education without interruption. This had all begun on February 9th, when a controversy arose because the principal of Hansraj College had used the campus for her son’s wedding, which caused a protest that raised questions about the use of public resources for private use.
Later, around February 12 and 16, another controversy sparked by allegations of NIRF data manipulation. Multiple RTIs were filed by Parth, who later received a disciplinary notice with no charges specified. Later, he filed a complaint with the Central Vigilance Commission on 31st March and then, on 20th April, received his suspension letter.
“After the irregularities highlighted by my RTI application and a CVC complaint were forwarded to the CVO, DU on 16th April, my suspension notice was issued just four days later. Further, suspension notices issued to others during the same period have been revoked, while action against me continues, raising concerns about selective targeting,”
Parth Srivastava mentioned in an interview with DU Beat.
On April 1st, the college had uploaded the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP), which prohibited the students from speaking to the media without prior permission, posting defamatory content on social media, and recording meetings or administrative discussions.
On the day of the college fest, many decisions by the college administration, like restrictions on external artists and forcibly concluding the fest early on day one, caused a 20-hour sit-in protest. Many misogynistic remarks were allegedly made to the female protesters by the principal. The college administration gave in, however, on Day 2 of the fest, but the poor crowd management led to physical violence, harassment, and uncontrolled chaos, which led to police intervention.
Parth admitted to posting videos that criticised the college over fee hikes and administration issues.
Parth’s lawyer, Shaurya Vikram, argued that the suspension order is illegal and driven by malice. According to him, the order was issued without any charges, evidence, or clarification of the committee’s authority, making it invalid. He also pointed out that Delhi University stated in 2023 that it cannot regulate staff social media activity, questioning why the same principle shouldn’t apply to students.
In an exclusive interview with the editorial team of DU Beat, he mentioned that:
“ I was targeted because I’m the only one who’s willing to raise a voice. I received emails from the Special Disciplinary Committee formed by the administration of Hansraj without any proof, show-cause notice or relevant information. People allegedly brought knives and guns to the fest, and their faces were all over the internet, yet no action was taken against them. When a civil crime like alleged “defamation” carries so much weight compared to serious crimes like that, it raises concerns about the priorities of our institutions and the environment they are creating. I have been part of the same administration during my tenure, and I know exactly what goes on there, so I am not one to back down from a fight. We trust the Hon’ble Delhi High Court and the student community that we will get justice. ”
Principal Rama Sharma defended the suspension, saying it was needed to maintain order. She criticised students for making false claims and defaming the college on social media. However, she added that most students come to Hansraj College to study, and their academics shouldn’t be disrupted, as it is a “very prestigious college.”
The next hearing for the court case is on 8th May, 2026.
Where does the future of press lie? Does it even lie, or is it just another petrified reality waiting to become a manufactured myth?
A free press is said to be the fourth pillar of a democratic nation, or at least that was the norm. It is regarded widely as a highly potent part of a larger system of checks and balances that keep the nation tied together through politics, economics, justice and beyond. And it is the association of “free” with press that preserves it as a critical component especially at a turning moment in time like today where news is filtered for profitability and truth itself is accustomed to be molded like clay.
As a student journalist working for about a year now, in the limited time that I’ve found myself associated with this field, I’ve learned beyond the good-to-knows, that is, the way to stir up a headline or chase a story—the past months have pushed me to a larger realisation of what it truly means to listen, who gets to be heard, and what are the costs of speaking up.
India is a country of too many people from too many regions and too many diversities—here, too is to be regarded as liberating, as is the term “overpopulating” in overflowing our landscape with stories far more than the news channels or filmmakers can ever fully capture. ‘Untold stories’ in India thus becomes more than a buzzword but experiences lived and unheard, but yet a reality that finds itself limited again to the mainstream. In the ‘unhearing’ of such stories, what renders invisible is the people for whom it is not a story: those who are too marginal, too inconvenient, or worse, too disruptive to even be considered for Page 4, let alone front headlines.
Before I had the vocabulary for it, I had already felt patriarchy shape my world. Before I understood class, I had already encountered the sharp divide between those who have and those who do not. Yet, as an urban upper-caste individual, there also remains parts of my inherited identity that are silent; I just had the privilege to never notice or question them because they were stories I did not hear because I did not have to ever live through them. Journalism, at its best, breaks that silence.
I would like to believe that I have come of age at a time when the institution of journalism itself feels increasingly fragile by the passing day. This decline of the freedom of the press is not relatively new, but perhaps more visible to the eye of the common layman who continue to persist beyond the scholars, writers, journalists, and critics that have lived and died warning us about censorship, the corrosion of independent media, and the damage this does to the very ecology of democracy that journalism is meant to sustain. These warnings are not breaking news (pun intended), but the familiarity of such a warning may be part of the problem.
In conversations, I have found myself realising the unsettling reality that the risks of pursuing journalism often seem to outweigh the rewards: the best-paying positions frequently exist within systems that are deeply entangled with power and the ABCs of journalism are negotiated on the daily, unfortunately resulting in the death of the fourth pillar and a failure of what it truly stands to support. Yet in between the fading light, student journalism presents itself as something radically different: as something not yet entangled in the futile war between politics and spectacle.
I remember an ideation meeting we had for the DU Beat Print edition; I mentioned, almost apologetically, the opening of a new café on campus as the news tip of the week. It didn’t feel like “real news” to me, given what “real” had been ingrained into me, and it wasn’t until my editor responded with something that I realised that journalism, especially student journalism, is not only about documenting crises but also to function as an archival. It preserves the textures of everyday life, the clothes people wore, the food they ate, the spaces they gathered in, and the conversations they had. Journalism becomes a record of that very existence that tells future readers what happened, alongside how it felt to live through it.
In the brief and privileged opportunities that I’ve had to step into larger mainstream newsrooms, I’ve come to notice the behind the scenes of press production that positions itself as neutral, but is rarely unbiased. Behind every headline and breaking news, is a thorough process of filtration and of calculation: the economy of news, who funds it, who controls it, and most importantly who benefits from it. It is perhaps as ‘1984’ as it gets.
As we encounter days of what is meant to be a celebration such as International Press Freedom day, I instead find myself lingering in thoughts of the words edited out and the stories that are censored before the screens can ever house them. It is perhaps uncomfortable to think of how easily we scrutinise dissent and how quickly a protest is delegitimised, especially in student-led spaces where frequently power speaks louder than truth. But it is within such thoughts, and the questioning of such realities that possibility emerges: student journalism, independent media houses, and smaller platforms continue to carve out within the controlled mainstream such spaces of resistance even without the reach of resources. What they rely on though is by far the most important tool of journalism: the willingness to ask difficult questions and seek it answers.
Perhaps in reimagining the future of freedom, of truth, and of journalism in a landscape that silences, the Big 4 hides behind the smaller newsrooms, campus publications, independent newsletters, local reporting and spaces where journalism is still driven by curiosity instead of control. Question what you read and what is shown to you: interrogate and listen in between what is left unsaid. The strength of the fourth pillar does not only depend on those who build it but equally so on those who engage with it.
