Punjabi University employees in an uproar over syndicate decisions
Kanwar Inder Singh/ royalpatiala.in News/ March 25,2025
The Syndicate meeting of Punjabi University held on Friday, March 21, has come under scrutiny for being apparent eyewash, merely endorsing predecided matters without informed discussion or deliberation.
As the highest decision-making body of the university, the Syndicate was expected to ensure transparency and adherence to rules. However, it has now come to light that many of the decisions made were misinformed, and no one from the university presented the rule position, procedures, or context of the decisions which were either endorsed or turned down.
The meeting was held without nominated senate members and syndicate members as government failed to nominate them.
One of the key issues that emerged during the meeting was the performance of the Examination Branch, which faced criticism. Consequently, a committee was formed to review its functioning. The two member committee constituted by the Syndicate to review the Examination Branch includes Prof. Paramjit Kaur Gill, Head of the Department of Political Science, and Dr. Jyotsna, Principal of Rajindra College, Bathinda. However, the credibility of this committee has been called into question due to a glaring conflict of interest. The Examination Branch, in its letter, has pointed out that it previously imposed fines against the Department of Political Science and Rajindra College, Bathinda. This raises serious concerns about the impartiality of the review process, as it appears that officials from defaulting institutions have been tasked with review the very body that penalized them.
Consequently, a committee was formed to review its functioning. However, in a surprising turn of events, the next day, the Department of Public Relations issued a press note that vaguely asserted, without referencing any specific authority, that the university has no doubt about the hard work and rule adherence of the employees in the Examination Branch. The statement attempted to downplay concerns by framing the committee’s formation as a step to improve efficiency rather than an inquiry into deficiencies.
Adding to the controversy, a letter signed by the Controller of Examination, three Additional Controllers of Examination, and the Deputy Controller of Examination has brought forward a different perspective. The letter, while defending the functioning of the Examination Branch, simultaneously accuses the university authorities, specifically the Registrar, Dean of Academic Affairs, and Finance Officer, of non-cooperation. Documents attached to the letter substantiate claims that the Examination Branch’s repeated requests for attention to its concerns have been ignored.
Further fueling speculation, the Syndicate has reportedly given a clean chit to Prof. Pushpinder Pal Singh, a decision widely discussed as having been influenced by the Punjab Government. Sources within the university indicate that during the meeting, no one provided a satisfactory explanation regarding the rules and provisions governing the matter, leaving fundamental questions unanswered. Additionally, multiple department heads have revealed that their official letters have also remained unaddressed, signaling a broader issue of administrative neglect.
These allegations, if true, indicate a troubling pattern of mismanagement and selective decision-making within Punjabi University. The absence of clear explanations and adherence to procedural norms further erodes confidence in the university’s governance. As the controversy unfolds, all eyes remain on how the administration will address these serious concerns and ensure a fair and transparent inquiry into the Examination Branch’s functioning.
