After several students accused University of Hyderabad of being biased, and allowing only Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) – the student wing of RSS – to hold discussions and talks in the varsity, the administration has refuted the charges of showing any favouritism to any particular student organisation.

“The University categorically refutes the unfounded allegation that it is showing any favouritism to any particular student organisation in the granting of permissions to hold events on campus,” the administration said through a press statement to TNM.

A day after the Gachibowli police disrupted the screening of Ram ke Naam and detained a few protesting students, the protesting students from the groups of AISA, SFI and SIO had alleged that the administration has been selective in granting permission for student organisations to hold talks, discussions and screenings, which was reported by TNM. 

The students from these groups said that permission for their panel discussion on Article 370 titled ‘Kashmir: 370 and Beyond’ on August 13, was denied at the last moment while a similar talk held by ABVP on August 18 was allowed.

Read: University of Hyderabad allowing talks held only by ABVP, allege students

The university in its statement said, “Regarding the specific incident on August 13, as was already pointed out by the University, a requisition was submitted to the Dean, School of Humanities by a faculty member of the Centre for Comparative Literature (CCL) seeking to hold a panel discussion on ‘democracy and dissent’ in the School auditorium.”

“The permission was given promptly by the Dean as it seemed to be organised by one of their academic units. Shortly thereafter, a poster was circulated widely on social media announcing a panel discussion on ‘Article 370 and Kashmir’ being organised by two little known groups calling themselves, ‘Social Science Forum’ and ‘Abhiyan’, with no mention of CCL. It is because of this misrepresentation about the organisers and the event, not because of the topic of discussion, that the Dean subsequently cancelled the permission to hold it in the School auditorium.”

Responding to the allegations of bias, they said, “These groups could have simply sought permission from the DSW's Office to hold their event in one of the auditoriums designated for the purpose by the administration.  An event on a somewhat similar topic being organised by the ABVP was permitted to be held in an auditorium by the DSW on the basis of a written requisition.”

The administration stated, “We would like to reiterate that recent reports on disrupted events or administrative cancellations on our campus have nothing to do with the nature of these events or the content of discussions that were sought to be held.”