||

Connecting Communities, One Page at a Time.

Caste discrimination allegations against IIM-B director: Complete details inside

A government investigation reveals allegations of caste-based discrimination, systemic exclusion, and constitutional violations at IIM Bangalore, involving senior faculty members and the institution’s leadership.

Prabhav Anand 23 December 2024 10:05

Education post exclusive news image

An investigation led by the Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement (DCRE) has brought forward serious allegations of caste-based discrimination at the Indian Institute of Management (IIM) Bangalore, one of the country’s premier educational institutions.

The findings, submitted to the Karnataka Social Welfare Department on Nov 26, have implicated the institute's Director Rishikesha T. Krishnan, Dean of Faculty, and six other faculty members in constitutional violations and discriminatory practices.

Despite directives from the Social Welfare Commissioner to file a First Information Report (FIR) on Dec 9, no FIR has been registered by the Mico Layout Police Station, raising concerns about administrative delays and a lack of accountability.

The Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement (DCRE) investigation found that Gopal Das, a marketing associate professor and member of the Scheduled Caste (SC), experienced public shaming, marginalization, and unequal treatment.

The allegations stem from a complaint filed by Professor Gopal Das, an IIT Kharagpur alumnus and globally recognized scholar in the field of marketing. Professor Das joined IIM Bangalore in April 2018 as an Associate Professor, opting not to avail himself of reservation benefits despite being a member of the Dalit community.

Professor Das has earned significant accolades throughout his academic career, including being recognized as one of Stanford University’s top two percent of professors for five consecutive years. However, he has alleged systemic harassment at IIM Bangalore, which he attributes to caste discrimination.

IIM Bangalore Director Rishikesha T. Krishnan

According to his complaint, the discriminatory actions included:

  • Exclusion from participating in institutional activities.
  • Forced withdrawal of elective courses and doctoral programs he initiated.
  • Denial of access to institutional resources critical for academic and research purposes.
  • Public disclosure of his caste in mass emails, leading to targeted humiliation.

The Investigation: The case came to public attention in January 2024 when Professor Das met with the President of India, Draupadi Murmu, during her visit to IIM Bangalore. He detailed the alleged caste-based harassment both in person and through a formal letter to the President’s office.

Following this interaction, the President directed the Karnataka Chief Secretary to initiate a formal inquiry. The Directorate of Civil Rights Enforcement began its investigation in March 2024, culminating in a report confirming systemic caste-based discrimination at the institution.

Key findings from the investigation include:

  1. Public Revelation of Caste: Emails sent by Director Rishikesha T. Krishnan and Dean of Faculty Dinesh Kumar allegedly disclosed Professor Das’s caste status, violating his dignity and privacy.
  2. Denial of Equal Opportunities: Professor Das was systematically excluded from academic and administrative opportunities.
  3. Failure to Address Grievances: The institute was found to be in non-compliance with legal requirements to establish grievance redressal mechanisms for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe members.

The findings were formally submitted to the Principal Secretary of the Social Welfare Department. In response, the Social Welfare Commissioner directed the Bangalore Police Commissioner to register an FIR against the accused. However, despite this directive, no action has been taken.

Professor Das has alleged that the inquiry itself resulted in intensified harassment. In a letter to the Social Welfare Department dated May 15, he outlined retaliatory actions taken by the institute’s administration, including a show-cause notice accusing him of unauthorized communication with the media.

Legal and Institutional Repercussions

The accused individuals, including Board Chairman Devi Prasad Shetty, sought relief from the Karnataka High Court. While the court granted temporary relief to Dr. Shetty, it denied similar stays for the other accused. The Advocate General of Karnataka is reportedly pursuing legal measures to vacate the relief order.

Prominent activist Anil Wagde has revealed that Dr. Shetty was questioned during the investigation but obtained a court stay before its conclusion. Activists have called for reforms in grievance redressal mechanisms to ensure justice and prevent further incidents of discrimination.

Education Post attempted to contact IIM professors regarding the issue, but all of them declined to comment in person.

IIM Bangalore has issued an official statement emphasizing its commitment to diversity and inclusivity.

In the statement the institute mentioned, “IIM Bangalore (“IIMB”) was established in 1973 by the Government of India Today, IIMB is an Institution of National Importance under the IIM Act 2018. The Institute is conscious of its responsibilities and obligations as a premier institute of higher learning in India. Its Board, faculty and students are all leading individuals in their respective fields, and the excellent reputation of IIMs is recognised across the world. Since its inception, IIMB has applied principles of inclusivity, diversity, and equal opportunity for all. It has always upheld the highest standards of fairness and respect for individuals irrespective of their caste, religion, and background.”

The institute added, “IIMB has a Diversity and Inclusion Cell, along with a Diversity and Inclusion Grievance Redressal Committee (“DIGRC”), which provides support and promptly addresses grievances, ensuring a discrimination-free atmosphere. Further, it follows constitutional directives in the admission of students to its academic programmes and also its obligations with respect to the reservation to be provided to SC, ST, OBC and EWS students in its academic programmes including its flagship 2-year Post Graduate programme in Management that leads to the award of an MBA degree.”

About the issue of discrimination, the institute clarified stating, “IIMB is aware of the investigation initiated by the DCRE and has shared all relevant information with them. It has not been provided with the copy of any report. However, if the media reports are to be relied upon, then it is an unfortunate development, but we cannot comment on any specifics without a copy of the report.”

“In the specific case of Dr. Gopal Das rather than harassment or discrimination, Dr. Das has received all forms of support from the Institute since his recruitment in 2018, starting with his applying for the position of Assistant Professor, but being offered the role of Associate Professor based on his qualifications and experience. He has received significant incentives since he joined IIMB for his research and teaching, in addition to his salary as Associate Professor as per the 7th Central Pay Commission of the Government of India. He has been given positions of responsibility including Chairperson, Institutional Review Board; Member, Career Development Services Committee and Member, Diversity & Inclusion Committee. and he has taught courses of his choice across different academic programmes of the Institute.”

“Dr. Das’s allegations of discrimination against the Institute and its faculty arose only when his application for promotion was put on hold because of complaints of harassment lodged by some doctoral students against him. An enquiry conducted by IIMB as per the rules, with the committee including a reputed academic from the SC category from an eminent institution, found that the students’ complaints were justified.”

“The DIGRC found Dr. Das’s complaints of harassment and discrimination to be unfounded. It is to be noted that the entire evidence of the above have been provided by the IIMB to the DCRE. However, from the news reports suggesting that the Institute has been indicted, it appears that the same has not been considered by the DCRE.”

The Karnataka government faces mounting pressure from activists, academic communities, and civil rights organizations to expedite the legal process. Nagsen Sonare, National President of BANAE, criticized the lack of action by the police despite explicit directions from the Social Welfare Department.

Efforts to hold the accused accountable are intensifying. The Advocate General’s pursuit of legal remedies, coupled with growing public scrutiny, underscores the importance of resolving this case to uphold justice and institutional integrity.

VTT

Also Read

    Latest News

    advertisement

    Also Read


    Latest News

    advertisement

    Loading ...