UoH issues clarification on student suspensions, advises to call off the protest

“They have appealed for reconsideration of their punishment, which will be discussed in the upcoming meeting of the Executive Council of the University.”

Claiming that the protests since Monday, 24 June, are “coercive in nature”, the administration stated the students have resorted to “exert pressure on the University Administration.”

The administration has suspended five students including the elected student union leader Atiq Ahmed for six months and levied a fine of ₹10,000 on five more SFI members in response to the protests organised by the students to conduct the “Sukoon” festival in May 2024.

Also Read: University of Hyderabad suspends student union president and four others for protesting

‘Followed due process’

According to the clarification issued by the Registrar Dr Devesh Nigam, titled, “Facts on the ongoing student protests”, the action against students was taken in response to the protests in front of the Vice Chancellor’s residence late on the intervening night of 17 and 18 May.

The clarification read: “This action, occurring at 1 AM, caused substantial disturbance to the Vice-Chancellor, his elderly 95-year-old mother, and other residents, necessitating intervention from law enforcement to ensure safety and order as the students refused to vacate the premises despite appeals by senior officials, including the Dean of Students Welfare.”

The administration further said that the disciplinary action involved followed due process.

The statement read: “The university’s disciplinary action, including the suspension of the students involved, followed due process and consultations with relevant university bodies, including the Proctorial Board and disciplinary committees. These decisions were made in accordance with established protocols aimed at maintaining discipline and ensuring the safety and security of all members of the university community.”

The clarification also stated that there was no communication breakdown between the administration and students’ union as alleged by the students.

Also Read: Telangana government carries out reshuffle of IAS officers

On ‘Sukoon’ fest

The administration claimed that the postponement of the fest was due to logistical reasons, with the vacation starting and the Model Code of Conduct being in place during May.

“It is important to note that University authorities extensively engaged with the Students’ Union, including multiple meetings to address concerns and explain reasons behind postponing SUKOON. ”

The clarification further attached an order dated 17 May, stating the reasons for the postponement of the fest.

Listing the conditions laid down by the DCP, Madhapur, like sound management, crowd control, and adherence to electoral norms, the order stated, “It has been communicated to the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), Madhapur Zone, Cyberabad, that full compliance with many of these conditions may pose logistical challenges and may not be feasible in practical terms, thereby potentially undermining the essence of Sukoon.”

“Moreover, recognizing that the proposed dates for Sukoon coincide with the designated vacation period, the administration acknowledges the imprudence of permitting such an event during this timeframe. The potential disruption and the resultant limitation on student participation due to holiday travel necessitate a reconsideration of the proposed schedule.”

The order concluded by suggesting that the “Student’s Union engage in consultations with the Dean of Student’s Welfare to propose alternative dates during the subsequent semester.”

Students’ version

Speaking to South First, on Monday, Kripa Maria George, former general secretary of the students union and secretary of SFI-Hyderabad Central University stated, “The fest was supposed to happen during the last week of April, but the administration asked us to postpone, due to the ABVP violence that happened then. We agreed to the postponement, and suggested the date of 23 May, as the exams were being held until 22 May.”

“Initially, they said they had no issue with the date, but instead on police permission, for which we approached the police, and they gave us conditional permission. However, the administration denied the permission for Fest stating that we didn’t have complete police permission, and also that the vacation was starting.”

“We then met the Deputy Commissioner of Police from the Union, and they said that they were willing to cooperate fully, and also provide police protection. They asked us to sign and give that we won’t create any issue, to which we agreed.”

On protest at VC residence

Further elaborating on the incidents of the day on 17 May, Kripa says, “At around 9:00 PM the administration gave us the permission, but again in an hour, around 10:30 PM, they revoked the permission.”

Kripa added, “As the administration left the meeting abruptly and was not answering our calls, on the intervening night of 17 and 18 May, we protested near Vice Chancellor BJ Rao’s guest house. Our only demand was that the VC at least assure us a meeting on 18 May morning.”

Kripa reiterated, “It was a very peaceful and democratic protest, but they filed an FIR against five of us the next morning and charged us with house arrest and trespassing.”

The FIR was filed against, Atiq Ahmed, Kripa Maria George, G Mohith, Asika, and Sohail.

Kripa further shares that, in the proctor notice, and order, the administration has reiterated that the students attacked the VC lodge, “There was no attack at all, actually in the meeting that happened before the FIR was filed, we got to know that, the VC and others were suggesting to rusticate 35 students.”