“Tum To Achchi Family Se Ho, Tumhe Reservation Kyo Chahiye?”: Allahabad HC Orders Judicial Inquiry Into Alleged Caste Discrimination at Prayagraj NLU
The Allahabad High Court has ordered an independent judicial inquiry into allegations of caste-based humiliation and discrimination raised by students of Dr Rajendra Prasad National Law University (RPNLU), Prayagraj. The Court has also directed an independent re-evaluation of a student’s answer sheets and relieved the concerned faculty member of administrative responsibilities pending the inquiries.
Student Alleges Caste-Based Remarks
The case was filed by two petitioners, including a PhD research scholar and a fifth-semester BA LLB (Hons.) student. The student alleged that the Head of the Department of Law, who also served as a hostel warden, subjected him to caste-based humiliation and retaliation.
According to the complaint, after the student secured the highest marks in Constitutional Law-I, the faculty member allegedly remarked, “Tum to achchi family se ho, tumhe reservation kyo chahiye?”
The student further alleged that his answer sheets were subsequently evaluated more strictly because of his caste. He also alleged that repeated complaints to the university administration did not result in effective action.
HC Orders Judicial Inquiry
Justice Vinod Diwakar, in an order dated September 16, said the allegations were serious and required examination by an impartial agency. The Court appointed a Judge of the Small Cause Court, Prayagraj, and the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Prayagraj, to conduct the inquiry.
The inquiry will examine whether SC/ST students were subjected to caste-based humiliation or discrimination and whether complaints were dealt with according to applicable regulations. The Court also directed measures to protect the identities of students participating in the inquiry.
Answer Sheets to Be Re-evaluated
The Court ordered the university to constitute an independent committee to re-evaluate the student’s answer sheets in subjects taught and evaluated by the concerned faculty member. The original evaluator cannot participate in the process, and the identities of the student and original evaluator are to be masked during evaluation.
The concerned faculty member has also been barred, until further orders, from evaluating the student’s papers or handling disciplinary and hostel matters concerning the petitioners and has been relieved of administrative responsibilities.
The Court has made clear that it has not determined whether the allegations are true, stating that the purpose of the inquiry is to examine them impartially. It has also asked the university to disclose whether it has an Equal Opportunity Cell and an SC/ST student grievance-redressal committee as required under applicable UGC regulations. The matter is listed for further hearing on September 24, 2026.
Case: Shubhendu Anand and Another v. State of U.P. and 5 Others, Writ-C No. 37012 of 2026.
