Calcutta University Overhauls South Calcutta – In the wake of a violent crime and a string of governance failures, Calcutta University (CU) has replaced its long-standing nominees to the governing body of South Calcutta Law College, marking a significant institutional shake-up. The decision follows the findings of a university-constituted probe panel investigating the college’s internal functioning, especially regarding the appointment of a former student leader who is now an accused in a gangrape case.
The move, which affects two governing body members who had held their posts for years, signals a broader intent by CU to reassert control and restore transparency in one of its affiliated institutions that has recently come under intense public scrutiny.
Triggering Incident: A Crime That Shook the Institution
The urgency to review the college’s administration came after a 24-year-old law student was allegedly gangraped within the college premises in late June. The main accused, Monojit Mishra, was not a current student but a former Trinamool Chhatra Parishad (TMCP) member and ex-student leader who had been informally appointed as casual staff in July 2024.
His presence on campus in a quasi-official role, despite earlier misconduct reports, raised immediate questions. It soon emerged that the governing body of the college had not only failed to prevent his appointment but may have actively facilitated it, all while CU’s nominees sat on the governing board without recording formal dissent.
Probe Findings: Eight Years of Irregularities and Silence
A fact-finding panel instituted by CU uncovered that the college governing body had been functioning far beyond its statutory tenure. Formed in 2017, its term should have expired in 2021. Instead, it continued operating with extensions, allegedly without appropriate university oversight.
The probe also flagged a series of questionable decisions:
- Unauthorized appointments, including that of Mishra
- Irregular admissions where lower-ranked candidates were preferred
- Absence of written opposition by CU’s own representatives on key decisions
- Poor documentation and record keeping of student and staff registers
During deposition before the panel, Vice-Principal Nayna Chatterji and CU’s nominees were questioned on why no formal note of dissent had been submitted. One of them admitted to verbal disagreement but failed to back it with documentary evidence. This lack of official objection was interpreted as complicity or negligence.
Replacements Announced: New Faces for a Troubled Body
On August 5, CU officially removed Yashbanti Sreemany, a social worker who had served as a nominee since 2017, and Sibranjan Chatterjee, a retired professor who had been on the body since 2012. Both had been part of the decision-making during the controversial appointment period.
In their place, CU nominated two senior faculty members:
- Tanupa Chakraborty, Head of the Department of Commerce at CU
- Kousik Gupta, Head of the Department of Economics at CU
Both are expected to take charge immediately and oversee ongoing academic and administrative reforms. Notably, Chakraborty is also a member of CU’s internal inspection team, signaling the university’s intent to place reform-minded individuals in pivotal roles.
While the replaced members have claimed they were not informed officially, CU has confirmed that the letters of replacement have been issued.
Institutional Accountability: A Legal and Moral Crisis
The role of CU in ensuring effective oversight of its affiliated colleges has come under serious question. Governing bodies are legally obligated to maintain academic integrity, fair recruitment, and safe campus environments.
Critics argue that CU’s delay in reforming the law college’s governing structure enabled misgovernance and unsafe practices to persist.
The High Court of Calcutta has also weighed in on matters of college governance recently, emphasizing that educationists, not political appointees, should constitute such bodies to prevent partisanship and protect student welfare.
CU’s Reform Measures: More Than Just Replacements
This isn’t an isolated administrative correction. CU has announced a series of parallel reforms:
- South Calcutta Law College has been dropped as an exam centre for the ongoing LLB examinations due to safety concerns.
- A review of admission records and internal audit of faculty appointments is underway.
- The university is also considering outsourcing entrance exams and developing centralized digital monitoring systems to prevent future malpractices.
The idea is not just to remedy the crisis at this one college but to overhaul the governance model for all 14 CU-affiliated law colleges.
Silence Is Not Neutrality: Lessons from the Crisis
Perhaps the most sobering outcome of the probe is how institutional silence paved the way for abuse of power. CU’s own representatives on the governing body—individuals expected to act as watchdogs—failed to submit even a single dissent note as irregularities accumulated.
Their removal is a recognition that neutrality in the face of wrongdoing is itself a failure of duty.
The lesson here is clear: university representatives must not be token attendees in governance. They must actively engage, question, and, when needed, oppose.
Calcutta University Overhauls South Calcutta: Reactions from Stakeholders
Faculty members, student bodies, and civil society groups have broadly welcomed CU’s decision to replace the nominees. Several have demanded further action against others involved in the administrative failures.
A senior CU official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said:
“It’s not just about two members being replaced. It’s about making a statement that inaction has consequences. From now, we will insist on accountability.”
The Jadavpur University Teachers’ Association (JUTA) also issued a statement calling for similar reviews in other state-aided colleges where governing bodies have long overstayed or acted without oversight.
Looking Forward: Beyond Crisis Management
South Calcutta Law College has become a case study in how institutional apathy can enable criminality. However, the events also offer CU a rare opportunity: to build a more transparent, inclusive, and responsive education system.
This means:
- Digitizing student admission and attendance data across all affiliated colleges
- Setting up grievance redressal cells with independent oversight
- Ensuring gender sensitization and anti-harassment units function effectively
- Making it mandatory for CU nominees to file quarterly governance reports
Such reforms could serve as a roadmap for other state universities in India grappling with similar challenges.
External Resources for Further Reference
- Calcutta University Official Website
- West Bengal Higher Education Department
- National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC)
- University Grants Commission (UGC), India
Conclusion
The replacement of governing body nominees at South Calcutta Law College is more than a personnel shuffle. It’s a symbolic gesture that sends a message: that institutional complacency is no longer acceptable.
As CU continues its investigation and introduces deeper reforms, the onus now lies on every stakeholder—administrators, faculty, students, and the state—to demand transparency, uphold merit, and ensure safety in educational spaces.
Only then can the university fulfill its role not just as an academic body, but as a guardian of ethical governance in public education.
Also read: Home | Channel 6 Network – Latest News, Breaking Updates: Politics, Business, Tech & More
