Protesting faculty get relief & promotion after they apologise, withdraw JNU case

For, since they apologised, disciplinary proceedings against all seven have been closed. That’s not all.

At least two have been appointed to chairperson positions in schools within the university, The Indian Express has learned.

Records reviewed by The Indian Express show that the first set of apologies came in October 2024 when four faculty members withdrew from the case and issued “unconditional” apologies to the administration.

Of them, one is a professor; one an associate professor; and two were assistant professors of whom one has been promoted. All four were either in a school of language or in the social sciences.

After their apologies, they were cleared of disciplinary charges. The professor was appointed as chairperson of a centre; one of the two assistant professors was promoted from Assistant Professor Stage 2 to Stage 3, then to Associate Professor Stage 4, and was eventually made a chairperson in March 2025.

Incidentally, the professor also made a Rs-10,000 contribution to the National Disaster Relief Fund as a “gesture of goodwill.”

Three other faculty members issued their apologies by April this year and were similarly cleared of disciplinary charges.

Two are professors and one is an associate professor; one professor is in Languages and one in social sciences; the associate professor is in Languages.

The Indian Express reached out to all seven faculty members who withdrew from the petition and tendered unconditional apologies. Three declined to comment, four did not respond.

So, of the 45 who took JNU to court against the disciplinary action, seven have withdrawn their cases, two have passed away, one has retired and withdrawn from the joint petition to file a separate case – 35 remain chargesheeted.

Of these 35, at least three assistant professors who have applied for promotion told The Indian Express that their applications have not been processed.

They were told, sources said, that an apology and withdrawal from the case were preconditions for promotion.

In at least one case, a faculty member who had been selected for appointment to professorship by a University -constituted Selection Committee —and whose selection had also been approved by the university’s statutory bodies—did not receive a formal appointment offer and was verbally “advised” by the administration to consider withdrawing from the court case and offering an unconditional apology.

When the faculty member sought clarification in writing, the university is learnt to have denied having made any such demand and termed the concerns unfounded allegations.

When asked about the promotions after the apologies, an official at the university told The Indian Express: “(Linking the two) is totally false and fake narratives. The matter is sub judice, and if there is any proof, please submit it to the university. The authorities will take strict action as per rules.”

The disciplinary action, initiated in 2018 against the faculty members, invoked the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules—typically applied to government employees—which prohibit strikes or any form of coercion.

The action was based on video footage and internal reports and was formalised through memorandums issued by then Vice-Chancellor M. Jagadesh Kumar.

Faculty members had participated in a protest on July 31, 2018, led by the JNU Teachers’ Association (JNUTA) over alleged irregularities in appointments, dilution of reservation policies, and the signing of a tripartite MoU with the University Grants Commission (UGC) and the Ministry of Education.

The issue of stalled promotions for chargesheeted faculty members has been raised repeatedly by the JNUTA.

In March this year, the JNUTA flagged this to Vice-Chancellor Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit following up on a meeting held on February 24.

JNUTA President Surajit Mazumdar told The Indian Express that the university is yet to articulate its formal stand on the issue.

“But in the style typical of the JNU Administration these days, it has been informally conveyed that an unconditional apology would be one of the preconditions for closure of disciplinary proceedings,” he said.

Mazumdar, who is also the lead petitioner in the 2019 court case, added: “There is no continuing petitioner whose promotion has been done.”

He added: “The invoking of CCS Rules to deem a peaceful protest of teachers as illegal and meriting disciplinary action with major penalties was so clearly a coercive move… The asking for an apology also has exactly the same objective. This is unacceptable, and the chargesheet issued should be unconditionally withdrawn—that has been the consistent position of the JNUTA.”