Slider Archives - Page 5 of 14 - DU Beat - Delhi University's Independent Student Newspaper

Inquiry to be Launched Against 12 DU Colleges Funded by the Delhi Government

By DU Beat January 27, 2024

12 DU colleges are to face an inquiry after alleged misuse of government-allocated funds and may face severe repercussions.

The Education Minister of the Delhi Government, Atishi, asked for an official inquiry into the alleged misuse of government funds in 12 colleges affiliated with Delhi University (DU) on January 20, 2024. This comes after the 1,897 appointments made by the colleges in teaching and non-teaching positions without prior approval of the Delhi Government in the past few years.

Earlier, a letter had been sent by Atishi to Shri Dharmendra Pradhan, the Education Minister of India, regarding the governance of these 12 DU colleges on December 1, 2023. The letter raised the issue of “several serious irregularities and procedural lapses” by the colleges involving hundreds of crores granted by the public exchequer to the colleges. The letter claimed that these colleges, fully funded by the Government of NCT Delhi (GNCTD), had illegitimately created posts employing teaching (939) and non-teaching (958) staff, accumulating salaries to be paid worth crores. Procedures required them to seek the approval of the Administrative Department and the Finance Department of the Government of NCT Delhi, which they failed to do. Severe actions could be taken against the principals and officials involved in the illegal appointments, including recovering the salaries of the illegally appointed staff since 2015.

Other problems regarding the utilisation of funds were pointed out too. She said,

Contracts worth crores for security and sanitation work were executed without adhering to General Financial and violated accounting norms and the approved “Pattern of Assistance” by the Delhi government.

Atishi addressed the lack of accountability of the colleges to the government as well as the University of Delhi. Due to this, proper oversight couldn’t be kept on these colleges by both the varsity and the Government of NCT Delhi (GNCTD). She proposed two solutions: either the colleges de-affiliate themselves with the University of Delhi and come under the complete control of GNCTD or, if they choose to stay affiliated with the University of Delhi, they must forgo all funding by the Delhi Government.

In response to this, Delhi University Vice Chancellor Yogesh Singh affirmed that the colleges will continue to be affiliated with the varsity. He requested that she withdraw the letter written by her to the Union Education Minister and continue the funding of the 12 colleges in the best interest of the students.

Featured Image Credits: English Jagran

Shatadru Sen
[email protected]

“Want Justice, Not Job:” Protests for Suspension of DRC Principal Intensify

By DU Beat January 26, 2024

Former Assistant Professor Dr. Ritu Singh has been at the forefront of the protest against the alleged display of casteism in her dismissal from the Psychology Department of Daulat Ram College (DRC) by Principal Dr. Savita Roy.

Protestors from organisations such as the Bhim Army Students Federation (BASF) and Mission Save Constitution have since the past 150 days joined Dr. Ritu Singh in claiming Gate No. 4 of the Arts Faculty of Delhi University (DU) to display their resistance against the structural casteism pervading the University.

The dismissal of the former professor had taken place midway through the COVID-19 pandemic without show-cause notice. Her allegations of casteist harassment against the DRC principal were initially dismissed by the Sessions Court, the High Court, and even the Delhi Police. Later, on 23 May, 2023, a complaint was registered by Delhi Police upon the intervention of the National Commission for Scheduled Castes. A list of the signatures of 35 students provided by Dr. Savita Roy as evidence backing up the termination of Dr. Singh’s services was also, as The Quint reports, falsified.

The Mooknayak presents a recurrent account of alleged police supression against the scenery of blue flags fluttering in the midst of small businesses selling books on Dalit literature at Gate No. 4, which was then reportedly vandalised, protest tents removed, and protestors detained. The incident took place in the early morning of 9 January, 2024. Questions were raised about the subsequent imposition of Section 144, and a complaint was said to have been filed against the looting of Dr. Singh’s personal belongings and the alleged unruly behaviour of the police.

Protestors have further claimed that the site was washed with Gangajal and Gaumutra for its apparent purification, along with the locking of the university gates and the dismantling of a poster of Babasaheb Ambedkar. The protestors took to social media to question the motives behind such actions. Supreme Court Advocate Mehmood Pracha questioned in a post on Dr. Singh’s X (previously Twitter) handle,

How will a space become impure if Dr. Ritu sits down?

On 19 January, 2024 Bhim Army Chief Chandrashekhar Azad joined the protest site to extend support and mark the death anniversary of Rohith Vemula. The Press Trust of India (PTI) reports that Azad, along with Dr. Singh, advocate Pracha, and around 80 other protestors, were detained and subsequently released.

In a conversation with DU Beat, BASF President Ashutosh Boddh confirmed the account of repression and claimed the structural complicity of the Vice Chancellor in the denial of justice and maltreatment of not just Dr. Singh but her fellow protestors. He cited the refusal to take action against the chargesheeted Dr. Savita Roy and DU registrar Vikas Gupta, the former of whom was in fact later appointed General Secretary of the Principals’ Association. He posed the question,

Why is it that we see locks on the University gates only when our demands are in question?

In a recent video uploaded to her YouTube channel, Dr. Singh sought an update on the five demands made before the Dean of Student Welfare. These demands include the immediate suspension of both Dr. Roy and Vikas Gupta, an investigation into the ‘NFS’ or Not Found Suitable option that the University allegedly resorts to when it comes to candidates of the reserved categories, as well as an inquiry into the other allegedly fraudulent appointments made to the University.

As of now, no requisite actions or response has been made on the aforementioned demands.

Featured Image Credits: Bhumika Saraswati via Instagram

Deevya Deo
[email protected]

“Allowed At Designated Places”- JNU Bans Protests Within 100m Of Any Academic Building; Violators May Face Rs. 20k Fine Or Expulsion

By DU Beat December 16, 2023

Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) has introduced stringent rules in its revised CPO manual, prohibiting demonstrations near the academic and administrative complexes. Students flouting these regulations will face penalties ranging from hefty fines to expulsion.

On 24 November, the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) Executive Council approved a 15-page Chief Proctor Office (CPO) manual containing the “discipline and proper conduct rules”. The manual stated that JNU students will now be fined Rs. 20,000 if they participate in a hunger strike, dharna or any other form of protest within 100 meters of any academic and administrative complex. Any act to incite intolerance towards a religion, caste or community or the printing, circulation or pasting of posters carrying derogatory religious, communal, casteist or “anti-national remarks” may also attract a penalty of Rs.10,000. This development follows an incident the University witnessed in October, where an “anti-national” slogan was scribbled on the University’s School of Languages building wall and the administration had later announced to set up a committee to investigate the repeated nature of such incidents in campus. Earlier, protests within 100 meters of the administrative blocks, which house the offices of the Vice-Chancellor, the registrar, and proctors among others, were prohibited as per a High Court order.

The manual has listed 28 types of misconduct including blockades, gambling, unauthorized occupation of hostel rooms, use of abusive and derogatory language and committing forgery. If a student is found involved in a hunger strike, dharna, ‘group bargaining’ and any other form of protest or is found blocking the entrance or exit of any of the complexes, they will be either imposed a fine of Rs.20,000 , evicted from the hostel for 2 months or be rusticated and declared out of bounds for up to 2 months. All forms of coercion such as gheraos and sit-ins have also come on the banned list. Arranging events such as freshers’ welcome parties, farewells, or DJ events on the campus without obtaining prior permission may also attract a fine of Rs. 6,000. If a student is found guilty of being engaged in any of the prohibited activities and is given a punishment, they will not be eligible to register for the semester and won’t receive a “no-dues” certificate until the imposed fine is paid in full. In addition to posting the punishment on the official website, the administration will also send a copy of it to the student’s parents or guardian. If the student does not show up for the proctorial enquiry, the committee will assume that the complaint was filed with a malafide intention, and the student might be required to complete community service at JNU. A complainant may also be rusticated from the University for making any false allegations against any student. Additionally, the University will no longer permit cross-examination between the complainant and the defendant, which was an important rule of proctorial enquiry earlier. A student who has received 5 or more punishments during the duration of their study shall be expelled from the University, the manual noted.

The foreword to the manual by Chief Proctor N. Janardhana Raju emphasized the strong need to reassess the current disciplinary regulations of the Office of the Chief Proctor as there were “no substantially approved rules and regulations on proper conduct and discipline of students by the Executive Council of JNU in vogue”. According to the manual, in the event that a dispute arises about the interpretation of any of these guidelines, the Vice-Chancellor of the University, Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit or the appropriate authorities will have the last say. They will also have the power to waive, change or uphold the punishment if deemed fit. The university administration asserts that the new rules are important for maintaining academic and administrative order and preventing any disruptions. They argue that the designated protest areas within the campus are sufficient for expressing student concerns.

Responding to the uproar against the new regulations, VC Pandit, reportedly told the Indian Express that these rules have been fine-tuned on the directions of the Delhi High Court. (Source: CNBC-TV18)

This is not old not new. Passed unanimously by the EC last month as the manual had to be made legally sound. The fines are on indiscipline of drinking, drugs and misbehavior in hostels and towards women. The proctor’s office since 1969 has been taking action, imposing fines and rustications.

– JNU VC reportedly told the PTI.

During her discussion with the Hindustan Times, she highlighted that the University has not banned protests on campus as freedom of speech is a Constitutional right, emphasizing that fines and rustications existed even during her student years at JNU. The recent move to make it public was undertaken to ensure transparency, aligning with their democratic functioning.

I have never imposed a fine on any student just because he or she participated in a protest on campus. The students even protested at my house over some water issue at a hostel. But I did not impose a fine on anyone for it. I have forgiven fines imposed by the latest regime on many students between 2016 and 2022 and closed their cases considering their futures.

– she told the Hindustan Times.

Talking about how the recent approval by the Executive Council (EC) was aimed at ensuring the manual’s legal validity, she clarified that fines are imposed for issues related to indiscipline and that no slabs have been raised.

The manual was passed by the Executive Council of the University, which also has representatives from the faculty. The administration circulated the manual among all EC members on November 1, and it was unanimously passed by the Council during a meeting on November 24. Nobody raised objections over anything because there was nothing new in it, and no slabs were raised. We only put it in a legal language and got it passed legally. Till today (December 13), no single letter has been received by the administration or VC office from students or staff asking to withdraw the manual.

– JNU VC told the media.

On December 12, a day after the University faced flak over its newly released stringent measures, an official clarified that protests have not been banned and are allowed at designated areas.

We have not changed anything. These rules were already there in place. We have just introduced a few other regulations to ensure no disruption is caused to the academic process. Students still have the democratic right to protest at designated places.

– an official from the University told PTI.

Reacting to the revised manual, the JNU Students’ Union (JNUSU) termed it an attempt by the administration to “stifle dissent” on the campus and alleged that the Proctor’s Office is being used to carry out “political vendetta against student activists and representatives raising important student community issues”. Demanding its immediate withdrawal, the JNUSU added that the manual lacked clarity on several crucial aspects, leaving room for misinterpretation and arbitrary implementation.

The stringent measures outlined in the manual are aimed at stifling the vibrant campus culture that has defined JNU for decades. Such excessive regulations are intended to discourage open discussions, dissent, and intellectual exploration, which are fundamental to the spirit of our university. Such ambiguous rules can lead to unfair and discriminatory practices, jeopardizing the rights of students

– JNUSU in a statement.

Student bodies at the University have also condemned the move saying that it snatches away the democratic rights of students to register dissent.

Who will decide what is harming someone’s moral sentiment and what is not? How can my peaceful protest,‌‌ which is against fee hikes or injustice, be considered moral turpitude? Additionally many students in JNU are below the poverty line – so how do they expect these students to pay such high fines?

– said a student at JNU as reported by CNBC-TV18

Nine months ago, in February 2023, the University had issued a notification stating that the students can be imposed with a penalty of Rs. 20,000 for holding dharnas and face admission cancellation or a fine upto Rs. 30,000 for resorting to violence in the University. However, following its criticism, the notification was reportedly withdrawn within a week.

Featured Image Credits: Deccan Chronicle

Manvi Goel

Mad Women in the Attic: The MH Hostel, A Take

By DU Beat December 15, 2023

This is a narrative of dissent, dissatisfaction, and a culture of resistance.

On a sunny winter morning, five young women sit on the bricked steps of Miranda House (MH) with a single tiffin in their hands. Inside the tiffin are meagre portions of flaxen Lauki and three stiff rotis. This is food they have collected from the hostel mess, and it is food, they decide, that must be served to the college principal. Not out of the graciousness of their hearts but out of an overwrought sense of frustration that they allege has been building up since their first semester at the Miranda House hostel.

Dissent runs rampant in the history of the hostel. The Pinjra Tod movement arrived at its gates in 2018. Demands for the removal of curfews were initially met with a pity extension of 30 minutes. Today, the MH hostel stands as one of the only DU hostels that does not lock up its women at night. The strain of resistance that went into this achievement belongs solely to its residents. Today, however, it has been reduced to a tussle for basic necessities.

Food. It is truly as basic as it gets. The major grievances put forward by the hostel residents include two-pronged complaints of quality and quantity. General complaints of food quality have now pervaded the hostel for quite some time, with instances of people falling ill after having consumed the mess food. In one instance of the burner supposedly having broken down, the residents claim to have been served partially cooked chicken, paneer, and later burned food. On the other hand, I am told that food getting over before the end of meal times is a regular occurrence.

Even as I write this piece, a message circulates in the hostel WhatsApp groups about “uncooked aloo” having been served for dinner. At night, under the lofty palm trees that feature vibrantly in every single equally vibrant photograph of the illustrious institution, residents sit and compare the circumferential edibility of the rotis. Some claim to have stopped eating in the mess altogether.

These grievances are met with rationalisations on the part of the authorities, which residents cite as ranging from “taste is subjective” to, at times, blatant denial. While the gallows-humour approach adopted by the residents is indeed laudable, what of those who cannot afford to eat outside? Must they be punished for entrusting reliance on promised subsidised food and quality residence? A second-year resident aptly asks,

After such a competition to get a seat in the hostel, why do we have to face issues regarding basic things on a regular basis?

Hostellers claim that they are reminded, upon complaints, that they are paying less and hence should learn to adjust. While a comparative analysis of hostel fees in the North Campus domain confirms the assertion that the 27000 (rough per semester standardisation) being paid by Miranda Hostellers is indeed moderate, whether nominal fees are justification enough for compromise on basic tenets of existence is left to the discretion of the reader.

To track the quality of water, some residents recounted a diarrhoea outbreak in the month of January. Such an account is provided with the backdrop of the NAAC visit in mind.

In doing so, residents recall the Student Federation of India’s (SFI) threat to protest in front of the NAAC delegation should their needs remain unmet. The memorandum containing the same was said to have been signed overnight. This raises another point of contention on the part of the hostellers, wherein the authorities are credited with being responsive to concerns, but only after the residents have reached a point of saturation, which only precipitates dissent.

An analysis of this point of contention rings true, as one observes that UV filters have been installed since the last few months had featured reports of illnesses and mass mailing. Rat holes were filled, and hair strands in Dal were addressed with plastic caps for the mess workers. The fact that authorities address issues only in the face of dissent is perhaps emblematic of larger, more systematic problems.

The hostel union, for instance, consists of third- and second-year residents. As a medium of communication between the administration and the residents, the existence of a student body makes complete and perfect sense. What does not, however, make sense is the delegation of responsibilities for looking after the hostel to the students, who are also burdened with their hefty academic degrees, which is what ex-union members allege has been happening. This has led more than once to multiple resignations, even, at one point in time, the dissolution of the union, as well as an unwillingness on the part of the residents to be part of the hostel’s students’ bodies.

It is easy to dismiss these grievances with the refrain of ‘controlled expectations’ from all things ‘Sarkari’. In doing so, however, we reward structural and governmental complacency. Resistance thus has a degree of inflated importance within the walls of the hostel because things are scarcely resolved without it. As residents grapple with the resolution of basic necessities, it only makes sense that they uphold the legacy of the hostel, as they appear to have been doing: the letter accompanying the tiffin calls it “a signal of distress.”

Featured Image Credits: Telegraph India

Deevya Deo
[email protected]

DUB Speak

Just Looking Like a “How?” Questioning SC’s Stand on Regulating Coaching Institutions

By DU Beat December 15, 2023

Each time the newspaper unfurls another student’s tragic end, the pressing question lingers: when and how will this come to an end?

Welcome to the latest episode of the Supreme Court’s yet another fascinating dance of questionable rulings. In this piece, we analyse the court’s recent refusal to entertain a petition that sought regulation of private coaching institutes and a law to prescribe their minimum standards.

A fresh Monday’s dawn kindles newfound hope in the heart of petitioner Annirudha Nayal Malpani. Yet, in a distant realm, another heart faces a quiet departure of hope, navigating through the shadows of despair. In a plea that sought regulation of the mushrooming coaching institutes and presented data on student suicides, a bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SVN Bhatti expressed helplessness and said that the court cannot pass any directions in such a scenario.

The court simply denied coaching institutes as a factor in suicides and backed ‘intense competition’ and ‘pressure of parents’ on their wards preparing for competitive exams as the main reasons for the rising number of suicides across the country. The court clearly mentioned that “coaching institutions in Kota cannot be blamed.” While we can’t deny the fact that societal and parental expectations do contribute a major chunk to the child’s pressure, refusing to hear any fault on coaching institutions still raises a question of doubt.

The widely acclaimed coaching hub, Kota, reported almost twenty-six deaths in 2023. An analysis by the Hindustan Times shows that more than half of the students who decided to end their lives were younger than eighteen years old. To delve into the factors contributing to these tragic outcomes, we need to acknowledge and articulate the underlying elements.

In a report by The Quint, a student studying at one of the premier coaching institutions mentioned that batches with higher aptitudes were given better treatment, like fully equipped libraries, twenty-four-hour teachers on call, etc. The potential toppers were even given fully furnished apartments with a maid and scooters. She added,

When you see others doing well, it instills a sense of competition. But when you see them being rewarded with money and other facilities, it leaves you feeling insecure.

To also contemplate this matter from a psychological lens, the toxic practice of segregating students on the basis of their ranks and grades breeds an air of superiority among high achievers, cultivating an unhealthy sense of competition among peers. Not only this, but these money-centric establishments allegedly lure the potential toppers with money so that they bring fame to ‘their’ coaching institute. As students dabble with homesickness, societal pressures, and financial burdens, the toxic atmosphere intensifies the struggle.

Notably, this isn’t the first time concerns have been raised about regulating coaching institutes and their alleged financial practices. In 2017, when this matter was previously brought before the apex court, the judicial stance was that it fell within the purview of state governments to address and regulate. History seemed to echo itself as the Supreme Court once again redirected the plea to the government, leaving us pondering a singular question: Does this constant redirection yield any effective results? While the Rajasthan government did issue guidelines in November 2022, complying with the orders of the HC and providing assurance of a law enactment, nothing seems to have changed as the state still yielded the highest number of suicides since 2015. In a parallel narrative, the issues confronting the Delhi government’s negligence find resonance in the streets of Mukherjee Nagar, still crying for the ‘framing’ of guidelines proposed in 2020.

The escalating tide of suicide cases demands a no-nonsense consideration for nationwide, centrally mandated guidelines. The grim reality is worsened by the flagrant negligence and incompetence shown by the various state governments. It screams for an urgent and concrete response because ‘pressure of parents’ no longer serves as the only scapegoat, while ‘spring-loaded fans’ and ‘anti-suicide nets’ are not the resolutions anymore.

Featured Image Credits: India Today

Dhairya Chhabra
[email protected]

Exploring the Tapestry of Tradition: Insights from the Bharat Literature Festival 2023

By DU Beat December 13, 2023

The Bharat Literature Festival 2023, organized by Kirori Mal College in the most extravagant way possible, celebrated traditional Indian literature through engaging dialogues, debates, and readings. Eminent writers, scholars, lyricists, and government officials were part of the diverse lineup. While well-received, some criticised the event’s politicisation.

The Bharat Literature Festival, organised by Kirori Mal College on November 28th and 29th, 2023, is a LitFest that focuses on celebrating the diverse body of traditional Indian literature and facilitating engaging dialogues, literary debates, and celebratory readings. Over the course of the festival, scholars, writers, lyricists, poets, and renowned personalities from all walks of life were engaged in discourse about varying topics such as art, literature, culture, history, politics, and social issues. It went beyond its title as a literary event by housing art exhibitions, facilitating pertinent political discourse, and particularly attracting visiting students to the pursuit of the civil services with VisionIAS as its Knowledge Partner.

Eminent public figures such as the Hon. Governor of Telangana, the commercially successful lyricist Prasoon Joshi, and Union Minister of Labour and Employment, Bhupendra Yadav, were invited too, amongst many, many more. It is indisputable that the line-up of scholars, experts, and esteemed speakers ranging from Indian cinema to Cabinet Ministers served as the major attraction for the fest. Students from across the University of Delhi flocked to the event to witness some of their favourite personalities share their insights on the central theme alongside issues that specifically pertained to the speaker’s field. Students were able to firsthand engage and interact with journalists, scriptwriters, historians, filmmakers, and lyricists. As the guests and speakers individually have their own publicity from the media, press, and fanbases, these speakers were able to cause an influx of visitors to the event too.

Other than providing a platform for these public figures, the fest even conducted a variety of competitions for students that included slam poetry, stand-up comedy, a photography contest, and a talent hunt—all of which were met with a sizable number of responses and registrations. The food stalls, youth activities, and musical evening incentivised even those who aren’t necessarily interested in literary discourse to participate in the fest.

I really liked the event, especially the different speakers that were called. A session that stood out for me was- “Cinema: The Reflection of Society.” Amit Rai, Chandraprakash Dwivedi, and Priyanka Shakti Thakur talked about how modern films disregard ethics to show what sells the most. It was quite an insightful talk.’

-A third-year student from Kirori Mal College who had attended both days of the event.

Something that caught everyone’s attention was BLF’s attempt to encompass the diverse cultures of India. Speakers ranging from author Yadvinder Singh Sandhu from Punjab to Telangana’s governor, Dr. Tamilisai Soundararajan, blessed the event with their powerful words. Even the numerous stalls had books of various Indian languages, showing the level of richness the event tried to achieve

I enjoyed the talk by Dr. Sachchidanand Joshi Ji. I got a good perspective on the tussle between modernity and culture, how the two often don’t go along well.’

– An attendee in reference to the session- “Sanskriti Aur Chunotiya – TV – Cinema – OTT.

However, this mega event was heavily criticised by student groups and had a lot of negative responses too. People raised questions about the politicisation involved and criticised it. Many students stayed anonymous or avoided sharing opinions because of the potential risks involved due to the involvement of college administration in the event.

I have attended literature festivals before, and this is not what a literature festival looks like. This was clearly right-wing propaganda.

-A critic of the event

Few felt that the event was more of an attempt to push right-wing ideologies than focus on literature. They claim that the speakers called and the topics they talked about were clear signs of the political intentions of the events.

Numerous criticisms about the festival surfaced online, with concerns focusing on the event’s agenda. Critics pointed out that the topics discussed, such as “Pranam Main Hindu Hun” and “Sanghe Shakti: Bharat @2047,” raised controversy due to their alignment with Hindutva ideologies. Some online discussions also highlighted the problematic stance of certain invited speakers who openly support the regime and have advocated for the genocide of Muslims in the past.

In addition to the ideological alignment, student groups disclosed, under anonymity, the kind of pressure the administration placed on members of various college societies about volunteerism and promotion. Students from many departments also brought attention to the abrupt disruption in their classes..

Additionally, there were complaints about the lack of linguistic diversity, as most discussion titles were in Hindi, neglecting representation from North-East and South Indian literature. Critics argued that the event’s themes and titles seemed to align closely with the policies and marketing strategies of the ruling regime, further fueling online dissatisfaction.

Featured Image Credits: @bharatliteraturefestival Instagram

Shireen Peter

@[email protected]

Shatadru Sen

@[email protected]

Arts & Culture

Kamasutra: A Tale of Love in the 2020s

By DU Beat December 11, 2023

Kamasutra: A Tale of Love, a 1996 cinematic relic that failed to find its place in the Indian film industry of the 90s, gets me to question whether such a contentious movie would survive the scrutiny of the new era.

An unapologetic masterpiece or a stark spotlight on societal norms. Did the visionary filmmaker Mira Nair subvert gender stereotypes or reinforce them? Kamasutra: A Tale of Love sparked this debate when it first came out in 1996. In times when sex was considered taboo and Indian cinema, or just cinema in general, was still largely dominated by male perspectives, she told us a story about two young girls, Maya and Tara, who explored the complexities of love and desire. Set in the 16th century, the movie follows Maya, who, in the wake of a heartbreak, embraces her sensuality and becomes the courtesan of the king. The same king who is married to Maya’s former friend Tara is entrapping her in a loveless marriage.

While Nair was applauded by many for the brilliant cinematography seen in the film and the bold portrayal of female sexuality within the Indian context, she also, not so unexpectedly, faced heavy criticism due to its erotic nature. This resulted in the movie being banned in India. Now the pertinent question emerges: if released in the 2020s, would the outcome have remained unchanged?

Taking into account the female-forward intentions of the filmmaker, this movie was set out to portray that sexual desire is something that comes naturally to men and women alike. The female characters actively expressed their sexual inclinations throughout the movie. Inclinations that would have generally been a lot more silent given the time period Beyond sexual desire, Nair’s female characters exhibit a plethora of very powerful emotions, including fury, resentment, and grief. Focusing the story on the journeys of women and putting them at the forefront contributed greatly to the element of gender inclusivity.

Despite the benevolent objectives behind this movie, it received an enormous amount of backlash. While the power dynamics seen in the characters’ interpersonal relationships were a problem for some, the graphic nudity and eroticism infuriated others. The movie was called out for reinforcing stereotypes, insensitive cultural representations, and male dominance at play throughout the entire movie.

The question of whether this movie falls in the realm of commendable or critiqueable is a complicated one, especially if we are to look at it in the context of the 2020s. It’s safe to say that the movie, in today’s time, would potentially offend multiple cultures. Moreover, the evident patriarchy in the film would not align with newer feminist ideals. Although it could be attributed to the film’s historical context, these aspects would still be considered regressive, keeping in mind modern expectations for diversity and inclusivity.

Nevertheless, above everything, there would still be the persistent concern surrounding nudity and mature content, particularly where Indian cinema is involved. “Showing too much ankle” still remains a breach of cultural modesty in our country. While some people would argue that with a few censor cuts, the film could still make it to the big screen, I hold a different standpoint. Sex plays a crucial role in unfolding this narrative; without it, the story would risk losing most of its substance. So it’s fair to conclude that although this movie would have been looked at more positively where the feminist elements are concerned, I still do not think that the Indian audience would allow its release.

“Kamasutra: A Tale of Love” left a permanent mark on the canvas of film history. It is a production shaped by our own, a work of art that is beyond our grasp. As close as the Indian audience is to Mira Nair’s heart, this creation remains forever elusive—a reminder that maybe some stories are never meant to be told.

Read also: Barbie: A Review

Featured Image Credits: IMDb images

Lakshita Arora

DU takes Action against Students in Response to Attendance Concerns

By DU Beat December 11, 2023

Considering the low-attendance challenges, Shaheed Bhagat Singh College decides to undertake necessary actions for nearly 1,397 students out of the total 3,600.

In a notice dated December 8, 2023, released by Shaheed Bhagat Singh College, the institution decided not to issue examination admit cards to students with attendance less than 40% in the semester. The decision made aligns with the earlier notices issued to the students urging them to meet the attendance requirements as per Delhi University norms.

The notice clearly stated that students with attendance ranging from 40% to 66.66% will receive examination admit cards upon submitting an undertaking for covering up the deficit attendance and ensuring the combined average attendance of the two semesters to become at least 66.67% while declining the issuance of admit cards to the students whose attendance falls below 40% in any semester.

As per The Times of India (TOI) reports, Arun Kumar Attree, principal of Shaheed Bhagat Singh College, said,

“The college is now grappling with the emergence of a ‘college of correspondence’, where many students attend courses merely as a formality”.

The students have been given the final chance up to December 12 to rectify any attendance discrepancies and provide any other document or information in support of their claim to meet the minimum attendance criteria.

Expressing concern about the attitude of students towards attending classes and contrasting it with the dedication of the teachers, Attree added,

“Some students were genuinely absent due to extracurricular activities such as sports, but there are some pursuing courses outside or focusing on their family business instead of attending classes. Enough is enough. We can’t keep going on like this. Our college has to get rid of this reputation of its students not caring about attendance.”

Demanding a shift towards merit-based education, he also highlighted the need for reserving educational opportunities for deserving students while mentioning instances where students who secured admission through CUET treated the college like a mere examination centre, coming to college only for exams.

Featured Image Source- Livemint

Dhairya Chhabra

UGC urges Universities and Colleges to Set Up Selfie Points in Campus

By DU Beat December 10, 2023

To raise awareness among youngsters about India’s achievements in various fields, the University Grants Commission has asked universities and colleges across the country to set up ‘Selfie Points’ at various strategic locations on their campuses.

The initiative by UGC to set up ‘Selfie Points’ across all campuses is aimed at raising awareness among young individuals about India’s accomplishments across various domains, particularly the new and latest major thrust initiatives under New Education Policy (NEP) 2020, like ‘Ek Bharat, Shreshth Bharat’.

These selfie points are to be created “in accordance with approved designs in 3D layouts shared by the ministry of education.” The directive carried various themes for their creation; these included the internationalization of education, unity in diversity, the Smart India Hackathon, the Indian knowledge system, multilingualism, and India’s rise in higher education, research, and innovation.

These selfie points will not only serve as a source of pride but also enlighten every citizen about the transformative initiatives that have propelled India’s growth on the global stage. Students and visitors should be encouraged to capture and share these special moments on social media platforms, fostering a sense of collective pride.

–Manish Ratnakar Joshi, UGC secretary

The UGC urged all institutes across the length and breadth of the nation to adhere to these designs to maintain uniformity across campuses.

There is a unique opportunity to harness the energy and enthusiasm of youngsters, molding their minds with inspiration drawn from India’s progress in diverse fields. The selfie points will emerge as a dynamic and engaging place to instill a sense of national pride.

UGC is expecting the selfie points to become dynamic and engaging spaces, instilling a sense of national pride and awareness among students with the goal of inspiring generations.

These designs were shared on a Google Drive link attached to the UGC’s letter. Each design carried a large image of the Prime Minister along with snapshots of the government’s achievements in the fields of education, research, and innovation, in addition to certain representative pictures on the theme.

The notice received a considerable amount of criticism from faculty members and academicians. In an article by The Telegraph, a faculty member called this directive ‘full-blown propaganda to build a cult figure’, while another faculty member saw it as ‘promotion of a single opinion by dominant forces’.

However, days after the notice was issued, UGC withdrew the suggested designs linked to the directive. The regulatory body did not specify the reasons behind this withdrawal, though the directive to set up the selfie points remains intact.

Featured Image Credits: Himanshu Kumar for DU Beat

Kavya Vashisht

[email protected]