New Delhi: The South Asian University (SAU) in Delhi has been hurtling from one controversy to another—a reflection of how “petty” internal politics has overshadowed academic pursuit at the young university that was started as a unique academic project aimed at building a South Asian community of learners.
After Sasanka Perera, a professor from Sri Lanka and founding member of the sociology department at SAU, was allegedly forced to take voluntary retirement in July, a heated exchange has now erupted on social media platform X among former and current students of the institute, exposing the university’s “toxic academic culture”.
In July, there was uproar in the university after a student referenced American linguist and philosopher Noam Chomsky’s criticism of Prime Minister Narendra Modi in his research proposal. This was followed by his supervisor—Perera—taking voluntary retirement, leading to criticism of how the university is allegedly undermining academic freedom.
But the matter is yet to come to heel.
The incident has now sparked a dispute between current and former students on social media, with one group accusing PhD scholar Antara Chakrabarty—who, according to students, had first complained against Perera—of being a “co-conspirator” and “witness” in the proceedings against the former professor. Chakrabarty has denied the claims and accused a group of students, who she says are supporters of Perera, of “bullying” her.
While Perera exited SAU in July, the social media exchange among students started earlier this month, when a former student alleged that Chakrabarty and her PhD supervisor Dev Nath Pathak—chairperson of Department of Sociology—conspired against Perera.
The row intensified as more students accused her of being “complicit” with Pathak, recounting their negative experiences with her as his teaching assistant in 2023. The exchange took an ugly turn, when students began to discuss her identity and her privileged background, highlighting that her father is the vice-chancellor of a university in Guwahati.
In response, Chakrabarty, who is currently in the UK for a fellowship, filed an official complaint with SAU, citing “social media bullying” and “trials” against her.
A senior official in the university administration confirmed to ThePrint that the complaint has been made, but declined to elaborate further.
The incident marks another flashpoint at the university, which was established by former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh for students and researchers from South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) member nations. It also adds to existing concerns about the university’s operations, which frequently make headlines for all the wrong reasons.
Also Read: South Asian University is now pale shadow of itself. Blame geopolitics, protests & academic control
A movie screening & an email
As ThePrint reported earlier, students at SAU allege that the administration has been increasingly restricting campus activities, including banning movie screenings and disbanding various student-run groups and societies.
But defying the unofficial ban, on 4 April, 2024, Perera organised a screening of a Sinhalese film. This was followed by a discussion in his office, which, due to shortage of space, could accommodate only 15 students. He had invited students to fill out a Google form to secure a spot for the discussion on a first-come, first-served basis.
Four days later, on 9 April, Chakrabarty emailed Pathak, her supervisor and head of the department to inform him about the screening, questioning the “transparency” of the student selection process. Chakrabarty had not been selected to attend the screening and discussion.
Pathak then forwarded the email to Sanjay Chaturvedi, dean of social sciences at SAU, noting that the event had taken place without informing the department.
On 4 September, Apoorva Yarabahally, a former student of law at SAU shared copies of Chakrabarty and Pathak’s emails on X, alleging that they had been used in proceedings against Perera. “Neither did she question administration about unofficial ban over movie screening nor did she question turning off the query into proceedings. The record shows that she and her supervisor @devpathak were part of the proceedings as witness,” Yarabahally wrote in her post.
1/n In the past few years, South Asian University has become the very personification of dictatorial administration. All of our eyes have always been on the actions of the administration, but what of administrators who are co-conspirators, such as @devpathak
— Apoorva Yarabahally (@yarabahally) September 4, 2024
She further questioned Pathak’s decision to forward his student’s “query”, commenting, “While all of this seems petty to the core, it did push Sesanka Perera to resign. Now professors and students are extremely wary of their actions… Paranoia hovers over the campus of South Asian University…”
Many students responded to her post, resharing screenshots of Chakrabarty’s email.
SAU alumnus Sandra Elizabeth commented on Yarabahally’s post, writing, “A comprehensive account of events that led to Dr Sasanka Perera’s resignation … He was initially put under scrutiny for hosting a seminar series titled ‘Moving Images’ to screen ethnographic films, documentaries, interviews etc.”
Another former student, Snigdha, posted on X: “Antara’s role in the proceedings against Sasanka Perera and a young scholar, for his PhD proposal as well as her history as TA (Teaching Assistant) seems to indicate that she is in fact not for academic freedom nor has she ever stood for students within the university.”
In fact, previously, when there had been misogynistic attacks against Antara from anonymous accounts, many of us had defended her. But her actions now are indefensible, and she chooses to hide behind unsubstantiated claims of a witch-hunt rather than addressing genuine questions
— Snigdha (@Jksnigdha) September 21, 2024
Reacting to this, Chakrabarty called the unauthorised use of her email a “selective display” in a series of posts on 19 September, alleging that “Perera and his allies” had bullied her for over a year and misrepresented her concerns regarding “academic freedom”.
“If Sesanka Perera cares about justice, let him display all the official documents related to his resignation … The hefty post voluntary retirement benefits he’s subject to. Also to his blind stooges,” she wrote. “This is what academic mafia blind politics looks like.”
For a year now @sasmester and his stooges have bullied me and brought my name in for nothing in the name for something as serious as ‘academic freedom’. Let me ask this to people @Jayati1609 and @sasmester and all your stooges. And academics like me who are here in South Asia…
— Antara Chakrabarty | অন্তরা (@ant_taraa) September 19, 2024
Speaking to ThePrint, Chakrabarty denied any knowledge of her email being used in proceedings against Perera and her role as a witness. “He held a closed event, where my name was not mentioned. As a student, I had every right to question the transparency of such an event. I am completely unaware of anything related to Perera or his proceedings.”
She also expressed concern over the fact that Perera reshared many posts against her by students on X.
However, a former student told ThePrint that Chakrabarty was indeed involved in the proceedings against the former professor, with an official document listing her and Pathak as “witnesses”.
“It’s hard to believe she doesn’t know about this. Even if she isn’t lying, why hasn’t she reached out to the administration to ask why her name appears as a witness in those documents? In fact, she is the one who questioned the authenticity of alumni who had written a letter in support of Perera in August,” the former student said, requesting anonymity.
When contacted, Perera, who is now in Sri Lanka, said that he had invited students through an email and a Google form on a first-come, first-served basis for 15 seats, and that Antara had filled the form after the deadline when all the seats had been filled up.
“Therefore, her name was not there. In case she wanted to ask about the selection criteria for the film screening, which was anyway clearly mentioned in my email, she should have reached out to the organiser—that’s me—and I would have happily shown her the Google sheet. But that wasn’t done,” Perera told ThePrint.
On Chakrabarty’s claim that she is unaware of the fact that her email was used in the proceedings against him, the former professor said, “She can still write to the administration and question how she was made a witness without her knowledge, if that was the case.”
He said that the ongoing exchange between former students and Chakrabarty on social media has been ignited because they are angry and unhappy over what happened to him and also how she treated them in her class as a teaching assistant. “This is not the institution I had joined to establish in 2011. It was such a vibrant academic environment back then,” he remarked. Adding, “Now, it is a very toxic and anti-intellectual place.”
‘Toxic academic culture’ at South Asian University
Several former students shared their experiences on X from Pathak’s mandatory Research Methodology course classes, alleging that they had to suffer humiliation and harassment. They also accused Chakrabarty, who was his teaching assistant in 2023, of being complicit with her supervisor.
Arman Hasan, who completed the Master’s programme at SAU this year, posted on X, “Dev Nath Pathak made women feel uncomfortable in the class. He berated minorities. He graded based on his whim. Normally, I understand the power equation that exists. But you (Chakrabarty) willingly TA’d for that class.”
Another ex-student, Ambili Parvathy, who graduated this year wrote, “Dev Pathak has actively harassed us and taunted us everyday as not being capable of understanding the texts that he provided … Antara has also actively enabled what Dev Pathak was doing to us.”
overburdened and often when we asked doubts, he would either mock us , or take it personally as an offence when we asked something which doesn't suit him and leave the class. Antara has also actively enabled what Dev patak was doing to us. This constant criticism and humiliation
— AMBILI (@ambili_parvathy) September 22, 2024
Posts from anonymous accounts also claimed that they (the students) did not raise their voices back then because their “marks were on the line”.
“There’s been several times when we as students couldn’t contact Dev Pathak, the professor taking our course, and we had to redirect ourselves through the TA. In all of this neither the TA nor the professor actually taught us anything,” read one post.
Despite repeated attempts, Pathak and the university administration did not respond to calls, emails and messages. This report will be updated if and when a response is received.
Responding to allegations against her, Chakrabarty said that a teaching assistant technically has no power over anything to do with class proceedings or gradings. “…I stood for the students wherever required, reduced their presentations of heavy readings, stood up for higher grades….” she wrote on X.
“I learned Hindi to help students from marginalised sections. It is heartbreaking that these students are attacking me despite all efforts,” she told ThePrint.
A section of the current students have also come out in support of Pathak, describing him as a teacher who encourages critical thinking. “If he hadn’t been my instructor in the master’s programme, I wouldn’t have stayed here. His classes have been incredibly liberating. He always urges us to question and challenge ideas, and he never gets offended when we do,” said one student on condition of anonymity.
A PhD scholar, also requesting anonymity, claimed Perera discriminated against students based on their beliefs and ideologies. “In contrast, Professor Pathak treats all students fairly, regardless of their views. He evaluates us based on our assignments, not our opinions.”
Meanwhile, some students said that the social media outburst is because of the internal politics in the university.
“There’s a lot of political tension among professors at SAU, and their students end up getting caught in the middle. What is happening is unfortunate,” a postgraduate student told ThePrint.
(Edited by Mannat Chugh)
Also Read: University of Southampton has 10-yr plan for Gurugram campus. ‘Lower fee than if students go to UK’
This is common in ‘Mickey mouse’ universities. Of late, such things are happening in the IISC, too.
Good riddance!
Prof. Perera can enjoy the “academic freedom” he so pines for in his own country now. He had no business spreading his nonsense ideology in India.
Good luck to him!
Almost all such universities established during the UPA era suffer from internal politics resulting in a toxic environment. Academics and research suffer and students are the worst affected.
The root cause is that recruitment for these universities made during the UPA era were on the basis of political ideology. Merit was not really a factor. Neither was research output.
The creation of these universities were meant to provide state funded secure jobs to various shades of socialist and communist “intellectuals” who were sympathetic to the Congress and the Left. Also, these universities were meant to serve as centres of indoctrination of young minds so that foot soldiers could be supplied to the socialist and communist causes.
Unfortunately, things did not turn out as planned. These “intellectuals” got into petty fights and started indulging in factionalism and worse. What we are seeing now is the manifestation of the rot which had seeped in right since the inception of these universities.