Raman Sukar Garase used to work as a Mali (gardener), providing skilled labour to Nursery, Estate Office, IIT Bombay. He was well known for his skills, knowledge of flora and fauna, perseverance and caring nature. For 38 years starting from 1981 till December he has nurtured thousands of trees and plants, shaping their growth with his incessant hard work. By nurturing these trees he has not just contributed to the life of IIT but also has given a breath of fresh air for the residents of Mumbai. In 1981, he was called for work, but a proper interview happened in 1982. Despite working for almost 4 decades, he was never made a permanent employee of the institute.

Dadarao Tanaji Ingale worked as a helper for work of a mason/plumber/carpenter from 1994 to 2019. A permanent employee working at the Estate Office, IIT Bombay, appointed him for the work. It was the IIT officials at the estate office that paid him salary in cash, with the salary slips having IIT Bombay’s name mentioned in them. Tanaji Babaji Lad used to work in the central area, Estate Office, IIT Bombay from 1999 to 2019. He was appointed by an engineer at IIT Bombay. All 3 of them were forced to retire on 31 December 2019, without any prior notice, citing that workers over 60 years of age cannot be employed.

Though they joined IIT in different periods of time, they were destined to be connected in the future. On numerous occasions they worked with each other throughout the period, which developed a certain kind of bond among them. On receiving the news of termination from service they were shocked and became partners in thinking about their uncertain future. The entire work life at IIT started flashing in front of them. The feeling of being cheated and robbed started engulfing them. Being aware of certain labour rights, they thought at least they should receive gratuity. Raman Garase was the most proactive among the three. On 3rd January 2020 he wrote the first letter to the administration demanding their rightful gratuity. It was the first time in the history of IIT Bombay that contract workers were claiming gratuity payment. Administrators who were blissfully ignorant of their duties and legal binding to follow the labour laws, never on their own have proceeded to disburse gratuity amount, nor any contractor (though working for more than 5 years) paid gratuity.

Gratuity is a retirement benefit in India governed by the Payment of Gratuity (PoG) Act, 1972, which mandates that all employees, whether permanent or contractual, are eligible for post-retirement gratuity if they have completed five years of continuous service. The employer must pay gratuity within 30 days of eligibility, with interest accruing on delayed payments. The principal employer is responsible for paying gratuity even for contractual workers hired through contractors. This legislation emphasizes the employer’s duty to acknowledge employees’ long-term contributions by providing financial benefits at the end of their service, underscoring gratuity as both a labour and human right essential for a dignified retirement.

On receiving no response from the IIT administration, workers approached the workers union Asanghatit Kantrati Kamgar Sanghatna (AKKS) for support. Union leaders intervened in the matter and asked the administration to implement the gratuity act for all the contract workers. The union which was formed in 2014 had the largest reach among the workers with around 700 workers being their members. On various issues before, APPSC had been working with the union and with the latest struggle for reinstating hostel 10 mess workers, the solidarity between the workers and students were thickened.

After not getting any positive response from the administration, the union approached the student organization, and together they started to push the administration to heed to workers’ demands. In February 2020, workers submitted the “Form I” to the administration demanding their gratuity. Despite persistent efforts by the workers, workers union and student organization to prompt action, the administration remained unresponsive and failed to provide the workers with their entitled benefits. Early months of 2020 were also the period of strong anti-CAA and anti-NRC protests in IIT Bombay, where various organizations coming together under the forum IIT Bombay for Justice also got involved in demanding gratuity for the contract workers.

Meanwhile, realizing from the non-response from administration and the overall malpractices that goes into the campus, workers also started to put together all the documents they had, that might be useful to claim gratuity. Various documents they collated contained a document dated 9th January 1986 clearly stating that Mr. Raman Garase was working for the last five years under D. C. Purohit, Horticulturist, Estate Office, IIT Bombay. The document also clarified that the relation of Mr. Raman Garase with IIT Bombay was that of employer and employee. Another document dated July 5th 1984 strengthened this argument further, where the Director of IIT Bombay of that time, Prof. A. K. De on his letterhead mentioned that Mr. Garase has been working for the last three and half years within the premises of IITB campus.

For many workers the relationship between IIT Bombay and workers was that of the immediate employer and the employee. However, with the introduction of contractorship between the workers and IIT Bombay, IIT Bombay became the principal employer bound by not only by the PoG act, 1972 but also by section 21(4) of The Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (CLRA) which stipulates that if a contractor fails to pay wages within the prescribed period or makes a short payment, the principal employer is responsible for paying the full wages or the unpaid balance to the contract labour.

Even though the three workers fighting for their gratuity were contract workers, it was the officials and engineers of IIT Bombay who used to give them instructions about the work. They used to tell what work has to be done and where it has to be done. Even the decisions about their holidays and leaves were taken by IIT Bombay officials. Moreover, the IIT officials often asked them to do other work on the campus apart from the designated work, such as, Garase and others were asked to remove the ‘jhopda’ (‘illegal encroachments’) on campus. The contractor was responsible only for handing over the salary. During their decades long service, they have seen contractors change after a few years, but have continued working at the Estate office, IIT Bombay. Neither the contractor nor IIT Bombay have given them any terminal benefit or retirement compensation at the time of retirement.

IIT was already violating law by employing contract labourers to do work which should not be done by them. The CLRA, 1970 clearly states that if the work is perennial in nature (i.e., it is not seasonal or temporary but lasts throughout the year), it needs to be done by regular workers rather than contract labour. But in order to not pay the welfare benefits that need to be paid for permanent workers, they choose to keep employing contract labour.

The efforts to seek gratuity also got struck with the COVID lockdown where union, and student organizations were caught up in firefighting efforts as well as seeking rights for workers. The petitions written by the union and IIT Bombay for Justice till August did not receive any response from administration. In September 2020, IIT Bombay for Justice, again raised the issue of non-payment of gratuity to several retired workers who served the institute for decades.

For the first time, the administration gave a written response. They had admitted that the Deputy Registrar, Estate Office, IIT Bombay is the Principal Employer as per provisions of CLRA 1970 and Rules 1971, in an email dated 8th September 2020. This means that the Deputy Registrar, Estate Office, IIT Bombay is violating the law by having not paid gratuity to several of its workers, and specifically, to Raman Garase, Tanaji Lad, and Dadarao Ingale who submitted their “Form I” requesting their gratuity amounts in February 2020. They also mentioned that there is no precedence of providing the gratuity to contract workers so they had forwarded these demands to the legal team of IIT Bombay.

On not receiving anything from the legal team and as already 9 months had passed since the retirement of the workers, they went on to submit the “Form N” i.e. Application for direction before the Controlling Authority under the PoG Act, in September 2020. Controlling authority sought a response from IIT Bombay where the institute refused to pay the gratuity amount and chose to face the trial. In the labour court Akshay Sawant (an author of this series) along with the workers union secretary, represented the workers in labour court to argue their case. In the labour court, IIT Bombay contended that it did not have an employer-employee relationship with three workers, despite their continued employment over the decades under different contractors. The workers’ testimonies contradicted this, demonstrating that IIT Bombay consistently assigned tasks that extended beyond the scope of any current contractor’s responsibilities. This evidence challenged IIT Bombay’s assertion that no employer-employee relationship existed at any time with the institute.

Additionally, IIT Bombay had the audacity to argue that these workers were engaged for “short durations” and tasks related to “wear and tear,” such as “falling of branches of tree,” “nuisance made by cattle,” and “heavy rain.” However, the workers presented decades of pay slips, effectively disproving the institute’s claims and highlighting a serious disregard for labour laws. Tanaji Lad, in particular, demonstrated remarkable diligence by keeping immaculate records of his monthly pay slips over many years. In an era where even ‘prestigious’ institutions armed with elaborate and highly paid bureaucratic machinery,  like IITs, fail to maintain accurate records of their long-term employees, Tanaji Lad’s commitment to documentation stands out as an exemplary practice deserving of recognition. IIT was clearly trying to conceal the glaring facts with the malicious intent of denying what is rightful to the workers. There was also a deliberate attempt by IIT to delay the proceedings by keeping on asking for extensions, or not submitting the documents in the given stipulated period, making some lame excuses. The court proceeding took 2 years, with hearings happening almost once in a month, during the COVID pandemic. However, all the workers and their representatives were always present in the hearings despite their old age and health threats due to the pandemic.

On January 2022, the Assistant Labour Commissioner, the Controlling Authority under the PoG Act, 1972 passed an order concluding that the claim of workers is valid and further directed IIT Bombay to pay a sum of INR 4,28,805/- to Mr. Raman Garase, INR 2,35,170/- to Mr. Dadarao Ingle and INR 1,89,945 to Mr. Tanaji Lad. The order also stated that 10% simple interest is payable in addition to this from 31/12/2019 till the date of payment. It observes that the fundamental principle underlying gratuity is that it is a retirement benefit for long service as a provision for old age. Demands of social security and social justice made it necessary to provide for payment of gratuity. On the enactment of the PoG Act, 1972, a statutory liability was cast on the employer to pay gratuity. It added that the PoG Act is in the genre of statutes like the Minimum Wages Act, ESI etc. which lay down the relevant minimum benefits which must be afforded by employers to their workers. It also observed that the PoG Act, 1972, serves as a central law, and Section 14 clearly dictates that its provisions supersede any conflicting terms in other laws or agreements. It is evident that when the gratuity of an employee is governed by the Gratuity Act, this statute takes precedence over all other legislative or contractual provisions. It also observed that Article 300-A of the Indian Constitution states that no person shall be deprived of their property unless authorized by law. Thus, the removal of a pension, gratuity, or leave encashment by the appellant without legal backing or merely on administrative grounds is fundamentally unjustifiable and cannot be supported.

The Controlling Authority noted that IIT Bombay is the Employer in case of worker’s gratuity claim as per definition of an “employer” as per Section 2(f) of the Act, emphasizing those with ultimate control over the establishment’s affairs. At the time of the applicant’s employment cessation due to age, IIT Bombay through its contractor was identified as the employer since it controlled the establishment’s operations. The PoG Act, 1972 says that an employee means any person. This “any person” is a broader term, which includes even a contract worker. The applicant was initially employed directly by IIT Bombay and subsequently through various contractors, working continuously for years. The Controlling Authority observed that given the absence of any formal appointment letter, it can be deduced that the workers were employed under implied terms of employment, thus qualifying as an employee under the PoG Act, 1972. The judgment also details evidence submitted by the workers, including wage slips and ESI identity cards, to support their claim of continuous service at IIT Bombay, and it critiques IIT Bombay’s lack of evidence to dispute the employment relationship. The judgment underscores that in social welfare cases, where precise records may not always be available, decisions should be based on the balance of probabilities to promote social justice.

The judgment concluded that evidence submitted by workers confirms that they completed decades of continuous service at IIT Bombay, until their retirement in December 2019, when they reached 60 years of age—the designated retirement age for IIT Bombay employees. This duration of service and the retirement circumstances were not contested by the institute. Notably, although contract labourers typically do not have a specified retirement age under the CLRA 1970, IIT Bombay retiring these workers upon reaching the retirement age applicable to IIT Bombay employees, also proved that they are employees of IIT Bombay.

The judgement discusses the importance of livelihood as an integral part of the right to life (Article 21), as recognized by the Indian Supreme Court. It argues that the PoG Act, 1972, and other social welfare legislations like the Employees Provident Fund & Misc. Provisions Act, 1952 and the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948, protect the welfare of contract workers by including them in the definition of “employee.” This inclusion ensures that contract workers are entitled to the same benefits as other employees, including gratuity.

One of IIT’s contention with demand for gratuity was that it will raise objections in audit by Comptroller and Auditor General because many other institutes were not giving gratuity. They would also have to justify why they did not give gratuity to all the workers who worked before 2019. They would also be at fault for not mentioning about gratuity in the contract tenders that were floated over the years.

While the case was going on in front of the Controlling Authority at the labour court, IIT officials stooped further low to start vilifying these three workers in order to break the unified strength of workers. They spread rumours among campus workers blaming these 3 workers who went to court, claiming that IIT was always ready to give gratuity to all workers but now due to the court case, it is getting delayed. IIT Bombay administration has a long history of doing propaganda to break the unity of workers and sowing seeds of discord. Towards the last phase of the hearing they also offered an outside court settlement on the condition that workers take back the case, and IIT will only pay for the period of 7 years from 2013 which is for the latest contractor. So, their plan was to pay workers from the contractor’s side and absolve themselves from paying the gratuity money for the previous years. Knowing the malicious plans of IIT administration workers remained resolute and continued to fight the case in the court. While on the other hand some officials also promised that they are in favour of workers’ rights and it is a justified demand that workers should get the gratuity amount. They promised that they will make sure workers get the gratuity amount once the order is passed.

However, once the order was passed, IIT Bombay never paid the gratuity. Instead, to further delay the payment of gratuity, they challenged the judgment of the Controlling Authority with the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner, the Appellate Authority under PoG Act, 1972 in June 2022. The appeal by IIT Bombay lacked new arguments or fresh evidence, merely repeating points previously addressed by the Controlling Authority. The Institute again shamelessly claimed contract workers are hired temporarily for maintenance tasks, whereas the documentary evidence screams out loud proving otherwise. The whole appeal was a clear case of concealing the glaring facts with the malicious intent of denying what is rightful to the applicants. Workers sought help from advocate Sudha Bharadwaj, who argued again that they were under the direct supervision and control of IIT Bombay, which was responsible for giving work instructions, approving leave, and processing salaries, despite the contractors changing over time. The workers were involved in continuous service for IIT Bombay, often performing tasks beyond their initial job description, such as demolishing slums and clearing lake areas, activities that posed risks to their safety. The use of contractors was primarily a means for IIT Bombay to handle salary payments, serving as a way to circumvent the establishment of permanent employment relationships and avoid providing equal pay to the workers compared to permanent staff.

On August 4, 1999 a learned full bench of the Honourable Supreme Court of India, in the case of Indian Petrochemical Corporation Ltd vs. Shramik Sena [1999 (83) FLR 74] has ruled that the contract workers working in the canteen of the factory would be the employees/workers of the Principal Employer for the purpose of Factories Act, 1948. The Honourable High Court of Madras, in the case of Dhakshinamurthy S vs. Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Appeals), Appellate Authority under PoG Act, 1972, Chennai & others (2003-I-LLJ-32), has ruled that “the principal employer is liable to pay gratuity to contract labor”. In a recent case (Subramaniam S. Arjun and Ors vs ONGC), the Bombay High Court in 2023 ruled that ONGC, as the principal employer, was liable for the gratuity payments to the contract workers, even though they were employed through contractors. These decisions affirmed the workers’ right to gratuity despite the contractual nature of their employment and show that gratuity should be treated as wages, and the onus of payment falls upon the principal employer if the written contract does not ask the contractor to pay or the same worker has worked under different contractors who fail to pay gratuity even though the contract mentions the contractors to pay. This binds IIT Bombay as the principal employer to pay gratuity to the contract worker from the time they had started working for the Institute.

IIT Bombay kept proposing out-of-court settlement offers to these three workers, maximum offering compensation equalling 10 years of gratuity. However, the compensation was to be framed not as gratuity, but as a welfare contribution or donation, sourced from alumni and faculty. The workers declined these offers, standing firm in their demand for rightful wages, which they believe are due after decades of service. They recognized that accepting gratuity would set a legal precedent, potentially aiding thousands of other workers at IIT Bombay and even millions across the country in securing similar entitlements. This battle, they understand, extends beyond their individual circumstances and holds significant implications for the labour rights of millions of workers nationwide.

In August 2022, following a favourable ruling from the controlling authority in response to workers’ demands for gratuity, IIT Bombay established a committee to address the issue for all workers. The committee is composed of five faculty members, a retired labour commissioner, and three deputy registrars. IIT Bombay has agreed to pay gratuity to all contract workers for their employment since 2010, marking a significant victory after the year’s long struggle led by these three determined contract workers. Despite this progress, IIT Bombay remains adamant in its decision not to provide gratuity for work performed before 2010.

On 3rd April 2024, 4 years 3 months after the workers submitted their demand for gratuity, the Appellate Authority upheld the order of the controlling Authority and deemed the appeal by IIT Bombay invalid, in a significant victory for workers. Raman had endured significant mental, physical, and financial hardships during this long legal battle, steadfastly refusing to give up. In contrast, for a large institution like IIT, the costs associated with this case likely represented a minor financial blip in its vast budget, one that probably went unnoticed by the institution and could have persisted for years without significant attention. This victory in the labour court brought no relief to the ailing Raman, as he learned that IIT Bombay was planning to appeal against this victory in the High Court. He knew that an appeal in one more court meant a tedious legal battle of at least another 3-4 more years.

He ended his struggle for justice by committing suicide on the night of May Day, which is observed internationally as Labour Day. Looking back, Raman may have regretted the respect he once had for this “prestigious” institution. When it came to acknowledging his fundamental rights, this “prestigious” institution not only ignored him but also used its influence and reputation to drive him to despair, which ultimately led to his demise, instead of honouring his basic rights—simply because it faced no consequences. Instead of recognizing the workers’ rights, IIT Bombay opted to spend substantial amounts on hiring expensive legal counsel, prioritizing legal fees over fair treatment of its workers.

Providing workers with their rightful compensation is not just a matter of legal compliance; IIT Bombay and the entire campus community hold a deep ethical responsibility toward these contract workers. These individuals have dedicated years of service to the institution, during which they have woven themselves into the fabric of campus life, building close social ties with students and faculty alike. Over time, they have become an integral part of our community. Despite this, there is a palpable sense of disenchantment among these workers. They are marginalized and overlooked, as their contributions are rendered invisible and their jobs are perpetually unstable. This series aims to highlight these issues, urging a reassessment of how the campus community values and recognizes the essential roles these workers play.

The ongoing injustice faced by contract workers at IITs reveals a disturbing disregard for labour rights within these prestigious institutions. Despite labour courts twice ruling in favour of the workers, mandating the payment of their rightful gratuity, the IITs have obstinately continued to appeal to higher courts, dragging out the process for years. This relentless legal battle, seemingly designed to exhaust and demoralize the workers, has led to tragic consequences, including the suicide of Raman Garase who fought tirelessly for justice. His death, a direct result of the institutions’ callousness, highlights the severity of this crisis. The IITs’ practice of employing contract workers for permanent tasks is not only illegal but also a flagrant abuse of power. Such exploitation diminishes the dignity of labour and denies workers their deserved respect, welfare, and wages. It is imperative that these institutions cease their exploitative practices, grant permanent status to the workers, and honour their fundamental rights. The IITs must be held accountable for their actions and must commit to creating a fair and humane working environment that truly reflects the values of justice and integrity they profess to uphold.

Raman Garase, Dadarao Ingale and Tanaji Lad with their tireless fight have done what Raman did the best throughout his life. They have planted a seed, a seed for incessant fight for justice, and demand to be treated rightful and dignified. It is up to us now how we nurture and grow this plant they have sowed.

The Authors are students at IIT Bombay and members of Ambedkar Periyar Phule Study Circle (APPSC).

Related:

Raman Garase’s suicide on May Day, 2024 is a sombre reminder of how badly IITs treat their labour

400 academics & activists express solidarity with fish workers’ protest against Adani International Seaport at Vizhinjam, Kerala

Death and Despair: Reflecting on Assam’s Tea Gardens and Its Workers

The post Workers who sowed a Seed: Story of IIT Bombay Workers’ Fight for Gratuity appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Over the period of next four years, the labour court ruled twice in favour of the workers, ordering IIT Bombay to disburse the gratuity payments. However, the IIT kept prolonging the legal battle. The prolonged legal battle meant the loss of crucial years of post-retirement life where the gratuity amount is supposed to be helpful to the workers in their old age, to ensure them a decent standard of life on their retirement. The administration’s apathetic behaviour stalled the distribution of gratuity amounts. Their highly paid registrars and lawyers (formed to look after gratuity matters) sat in their AC ivory towers, contemplating moving to the High Court and, if needed, to the Supreme Court against the rulings of the labour court.

Raman Garase had recently learnt that the IIT was again planning to appeal against the labour court ruling. Disheartened by the prolonged struggle and the dimming hope of ever receiving his gratuity of Rs 4,28,805, his death underscores the harsh realities many workers face in securing their rights and dignity not just in IITs, but across the nation. The tragic death of Raman Garase is a significant moment that demands an introspection on the condition of workers in IITs. In this series of articles, we attempt to initiate a discussion on the workers’ conditions, with the hope that it will be followed by more robust discussions and political interventions that change the current state of affairs.

IITs: The Savarna bastions in post-independence India

To begin with, we need to locate workers in the larger political economy of the IITs. The IITs are a set of 23 public institutions of higher education, with the original five founded between 1951-61 through bilateral cooperation of the Indian government and foreign governments. IITs, founded with the idea of constructing a new nation, were declared to be Institutions of National Importance. Located in various corners of the nation, they were gesturing to the postcolonial states’ zeal for both national integration and regional commitments. While placing IITs as institutes of national importance by constituting a particular act called The Institutes of Technology Act, 1961 (hereafter IITs Act), they were exempted from applying the reservation policies that began for educational institutions in 1953.

It was this understanding from a top-down approach to science that, in contemporary times, many movements and leaders have criticised. It also suggests what nation it attempted to catered to by establishing special criteria at the foundation of creation. The IITs Act provided a shield away from the strong articulation and significant debates of the constitutional provisions achieved by long-time social and political movements of in contemporary times.

So much so, that with the impending pressure from various organisations based within IITs, like that of Ambedkar Periyar Phule Study Circle (APPSC) IIT Bombay and many other institutions, in 2019, a committee was formed under the chairmanship of IIT Delhi director to oversee the proper implementation of reservation (read affirmative action). Instead of devising a considered plan to implement reservation and evolve a clear plan of action for coming years during which they fill the backlog of seats denied for decades to the Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs) and Other Backward Class (OBC) candidates, the committee went on to demand exemption from reservation policy invoking IITs Act.

In many ways, the marginalisation of Dalits and Adivasis has been inscribed in the very foundation stone of IITs, which continues to bear its fruits even today and will continue to do so until a more robust restructuring does not take place. It is always the case with IITs that the administration has been constituted of what is known as the ‘general category’ (savarnas). Many chairmen of IITs, the Board of Governors, and council members come from the industrial sector and from among capitalist businessmen. The administration of IITs and members of various faculties came largely from among the savarnas as IITs “were exempt” from reservation. Students, too, largely belonged to the general category, with reservation norms still not followed to honour the constitutional mandate. Dalits and Adivasis were present only employed as grade C and grade D workers! Today, the majority of workers who are employed for manual labour on these campuses come from Dalit and Adivasi communities, while a majority of persons in the faculties and students are from among the savarnas.

“Casual” labourers in “Eminent” Institutions

All the IITs have been built on huge pieces of land, and they are well known for their lush green campuses. However, lesser-known facts are how the land was acquired for these campuses and how many persons and who got displaced. Many of the stories and struggles of Adivasis are buried under the rubric of IITs, where they were/are displaced from their land, cut off from their livelihood, and made to be dependent on the employment provided by IITs, mainly catering manual labour. Often, the IITs initially promised permanent employment and rehabilitation for their land. However, these promises were never kept and they often ended up as landless, manual labourers within IITs! This method of displacement has continued through the last decade with  IIT Bombay evicting local Adivasi communities of Peru Baug for constructing a research park. Only sometimes have local communities been successful in pushing away this land grab, as in the case of how the protests led to a change of IIT Goa campus site away from Sanguem.

Around the 1970s-80s, the process of contractualisation of labour work started when IITs introduced interim contractors for various works related to maintenance and smooth functioning of the campus. They proceeded to move away from employing permanent workers and started replacing them with contract workers (at times called casual labourers). The contractors acted as intermediaries only for making the payment of wages. The authority that has the ultimate control over the affairs of the establishment and the said work always remained with the IIT officials and not with the contractors. This enabled the IITs to hold more power over workers and not take any responsibility for providing worker benefits and security.

The casual/contract workers were paid less than half the amount which the permanent workers were paid for the same work. Such a shift in IITs like most other industries and institutions saved loads of money, some of which was shared to the intermediate contractors. This change in the relationship of workers with the establishment also significantly reduced the ability of workers to negotiate as they could be arbitrarily fired, which also held them back from unionizing for fear of individual targeting and retaliation.

Within IITs, as the campus area is large, the work allotted to contractors is broken into smaller geographical areas targeting particular kind(s) of work. For instance, tender for housekeeping work in the academic area is called for separately than with the residential area. Depending on the floor area, the number of workers and the material for the work are estimated, and the quotation is given. However, as noted, IITs continued to allot the work to these contracts, which was much beyond their area of work under the said tender specification of the contractor.

So, for instance, Raman Garase, along with many other workers, was asked to remove the hutments of the Adivasis living in the Peru Baug where today’s building of Research Park stands, calling them ‘illegal’. In this way, the IIT administration comprising of savarna and corporate lobby pitted the workers who themselves belong to marginalized communities against the indigenous people living in the area who were/are being forced to leave their land with their sources of livelihood also destroyed. Also, on a regular basis workers are shifted to different locations within campus to attend to specific works.

There is also a culture of treating workers as suspect criminals. Workers in IIT Kanpur have to open and show their bags when they leave the campus area. Workers in IIT Bombay were made to deposit utensils in a centralised location by the contractors as the latter claimed that they could not trust the workers not to steal them. Such practices which are employed under the guise of security are actually casteist practices of terming certain communities as criminals. Similarly, a practice of housekeeping workers having to obtain signatures from students as proof of work in the respective area every day!

Wage Theft: Violation of Labour laws in IITs

The Criteria for Prohibition under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (CLRA) clearly states that if the work is perennial in nature (i.e., it is not seasonal or temporary but lasts throughout the year), it needs to be performed by regular workers rather than contract labour. Perennial work includes works such as cleaning building floors, and roads, mess work, janitorial work, plumbing, electrical maintenance, gardening, and fumigation, which are essential parts of the campus. CLRA also states that any work requiring significant control and supervision by the principal employer is unsuitable for contract labour. Despite the law being there for over 50 years, these clauses of CLRA are being violated all over India, with premier higher education institutes such as IITs being no exception. Even though regulations stipulate that these jobs should be handled by permanent workers and not by contractual labour, IITs bypass these rules, opting to employ contract workers to avoid the obligations and costs associated with permanent employment.

There are various rights that are guaranteed for contract workers under the various labour laws. All contractual employees are eligible for the Employee Provident Fund (EPF popularly known as PF), a retirement benefit scheme, and the Employee State Insurance (ESI), a social security and health insurance scheme. These worker protection schemes provide an array of benefits, which includes medical treatment, maternity benefits, disability benefits, dependent benefits, and unemployment allowance under certain conditions. Both schemes are crucial in the socio-economic architecture of India, providing financial security and healthcare benefits to a substantial portion of the Indian workforce.

However, in practice, multiple mechanisms are in place to avoid providing the majority of such benefits. Contractors do several tricks to steal the benefits from the workers, whereas IIT officials, even in full knowledge of such practices, pay no heed to those violations. Many contractors deliberately do not create bank accounts for workers, sometimes even deliberately delaying their creation or even creating with mistaken names and paying the workers in cash for the entire time period. These workers are not paid EPF even though the contractor deducts EPF contributions from their wages. When workers demand their EPF, a small amount is given, much lower than the worker’s contribution over the years, and without employer contribution. Workers are forced to accept the lower amount as any legal route for redressal will only further delay the payment for years. Multiple instances of a contractor’s cheque given against PF and bonus bouncing were reported to the IIT Bombay administration but no action has been taken against them.

In 2022, more than 50 mess workers did not receive any PF amount, even though (Rs.1800) was deducted from their wages every month. The same caterer was found to violate the Minimum Wages Act, 1948. Sometimes, money is deducted from wages for uniforms, while no new uniforms are provided. Despite complaints raised by student groups, the contractor was not blacklisted by the administration, moreover received few new tenders.

Those working from before the 2000s have also noted that IIT Bombay was not paying EPF and ESI to the majority of its workers. It was after several demands from workers that IIT Bombay finally conceded to provide them with these benefits. However, for many other workers, such as mess workers and canteen workers, even today, even minimum wages are not paid, no proper accommodation facilities are given, and they are always made to work overtime without being paid. Most construction workers lack systematic EPF/ESI accounts and other basic labour entitlements.

The arbitrary firing of workers is another perverse phenomenon employed by the IITs to control and exploit workers. IIT Kanpur fired 72 workers from its Visitor’s Hostel in 2017. On August 1, 2022, 18 workers from the water supply and sewage department of IIT Kanpur were fired without prior notice, owing to a change in the contractor. IIT BHU fired around 200 workers without prior notice claiming a change of contractors in 2019. On January 27, 2024, Jagdish Pal, a Hall 2 mess worker of IIT Kanpur with 13 years of service, was unfairly dismissed without reason after protesting strict attendance policies that led to pay deductions and unpaid work. His suspension and subsequent dismissal underscore the severe exploitation and mistreatment of mess workers at IITs. In one of our next segment, we will also discuss a detailed case of 59 female mess workers who were removed by IIT Bombay.

Even the workers who are employed often face months long delays in receiving their wage payments. Section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, specifies the timing for the payment of wages and mandates that wages should be paid before the tenth day after the last wage period. IITs letting contractors violate these laws and withholding the wages of workers has become commonplace now. 4 men were killed when a contractor in IIT Mandi fired on workers protesting the non-payment of their monthly wages and EPF. Protests have been organised by workers in IIT Kharagpur, IIT Kanpur, over post-retirement medical schemes, pension, promotions, regularization of dependents of deceased/disabled employees.

Multiple construction workers have died in IIT Bombay due to a lack of proper safety gear and unsafe working environments. Similar deaths have occurred in IIT Kanpur where a gardener in the academic area tragically died within hours of reporting for work on a severely cold winter morning. In 2019, the collapse of the Earth Science building wall in IIT Kanpur resulted in death of three workers and in 2022, a worker at the Type-III apartment construction site behind the director’s residence died from excessive bleeding after a hand-held grinder slipped and severely injured his leg. The living conditions of construction workers at IITs are also deplorable, as they are compelled to reside in cramped, overcrowded cabins that lack basic hygiene and proper sanitation facilities.

Prestige and precarity

These violations of workers’ rights are not just limited to the IITs and happen all over the country. These “eminent” institutions are no different than any other institutions in the country, when it comes to respecting the rights of workers. They are as exploitative as the others. However, the overwhelmingly Savarna nature of these institutions does add a new layer to the exploitation of contract workers. The tag of an “eminent” institution also adds a structural angle to such exploitation. Many contract workers who started working here some decades back, had this hope in their mind that they will be accepted as “permanent” employees, some day or the other. Such acceptance would mean better living conditions. But for most of them, that day never arrived.

Even after multiple complaints about denial of workers’ rights, and even judgements from labour court ordering to comply with labour laws, IITs have been ignoring them just the way they ignore the constitutional mandate of implementing reservation for SC ST OBCs. They continue to give contracts to the same contractors who were violating these laws. This alludes to a collusion between the contractors and the administration of IITs to exploit these workers.

The workers of IITs face issues in getting their minimum wages, EPF, ESI, gratuity, healthcare, lack of safe working environment, arbitrary firing, and lack of strong unions that can claim their demands by negotiating with the administration. It is paralleled with the violation of reservation norms, stiffing voices of descent with imposing stringent code of conduct for students, workers and faculties, and rapidly expanding privatization of education.

The death of Raman Garase highlights significant issues within labour rights and the struggle for justice by contractual workers. It is a sombre reminder of the impact that prolonged legal disputes and denied rights can have on individuals.

Workers like Raman Garase, Dadarao Ingale, and Tanaji Lad, who have served institutions for decades, often face uphill battles for their rightful benefits, reflecting broader systemic issues that need addressing.

The decision of the IIT Bombay administration to appeal the labour court’s order, thereby extending the legal process, underscores the challenges faced by workers in securing what is legally theirs. Such situations also bring to light the need for stronger safeguards and more efficient legal mechanisms to protect workers’ rights and ensure timely justice.

Raman Garase’s tragic death, particularly on Labour Day—a day meant to celebrate workers and their contributions—adds a layer of poignancy to the story and calls for a reflection on how societies and institutions treat their labour forces. It is a call to action for not just ensuring legal compliance but also fostering a culture of respect and dignity for all workers.

(The authors are students at IIT Bombay and members of Ambedkar Periyar Phule Study Circle (APPSC))

Related:

Gujarat: Three years, 714 workers died in industrial accidents admits Minister

29% increase in daily wage workers suicides in 2 years: Labour Ministry

Over 42,000 workers from informal sector allegedly die by suicide

The post Raman Garase’s suicide on May Day, 2024 is a sombre reminder of how badly IITs treat their labour appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The latest victim of Hindutva wrath is Professor Ganesh Devy. A former professor of English at the Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Prof Devy, a renowned cultural critic and rationalist thinker, was scheduled to deliver a lecture at IIT-Mumbai on Wednesday. A recipient of the Padma Shri, Prof Devy’s lecture was finalised months ago and he was all set to speak on “The Crisis Within: On Knowledge and Education in India”. The students and faculty members of IIT-Mumbai were eagerly waiting to feast on an intellectual interaction with him. But at the last movement, they were shocked to be informed that the lecture had been cancelled by the administration due to “unforeseen circumstances”.

A scholar of international fame, Prof Devy was all set to leave for Mumbai. But a day before the scheduled lecture, he was informed by a person about the cancellation of the event. Talking to the press, he expressed his disappointment: “Such last-minute cancellations do leave a bitter taste.”

Commenting on the cancellation of the event, Prof Devy told The Times of India (February 1), “It is difficult for me to understand the motivation behind calling off the event. If I could deliver a lecture at IIT-Guwahati, another central institute, governed by the same regulations, then why not IIT-Bombay?” Note that He spoke at IIT- Guwahati in October 2023 on “Describing India: People’s Movements and Knowledge Production. But IIT-Mumbai seemed to have shuddered at the prospect of his intellectual expression on its campus.

Following the cancellation of the lecture, the students of IIT-Mumbai expressed their disappointment. Some wrote on social media against the decision of the administration. Condemning the act of administration, Ambedkar Periyar Phule Study Circle (IIT-Mumbai), read out a portion of Prof Devy’s book as a mark of protest.

It appears that the cancellation of Prof Devy’s lecture has less to do with academic and administrative reasons than political factors. Recent, previous records show that the administration of IIT-Mumbai had cancelled lectures under political pressure. For example, Prof Achin Vanaik of the University of Delhi was invited to deliver a lecture on “Israel-Palestine: The Historical Context” in November last year. But the event was cancelled. After the cancellation of the talk, dozens of students sent a letter to the authorities concerned, adding that such an act was “tantamount to destroying our academic freedom”. However, the administration did not pay any heed to the student’s concerns.

The reason for cancellation is not difficult to understand. Prof Vanaik, an eminent scholar and critical voice in international politics, has been a vocal supporter of the just cause of Palestine. His views are not liked by the pro-establishment scholars, administrators and mainstream media houses as the foreign policy under the Modi Government has heavily tilted towards Israel.

Similarly, Prof Devy is a big champion of diversity, pluralism and secularism. Moreover, his scholarship and life have been committed to upholding the rights of marginalised communities. As a result, the Hindu Right considers him to be a formidable opponent to their ideology of majoritarianism, exclusion and cultural supremacy.

Prof Devy is a scholar, writer, philosopher, activist and foot-soldier of the rational and progressive movements. He belongs to Maharashtra, the land of Phule and Ambedkar and his lifelong mission is to act as an antidote to the communal venom produced from Nagpur. He is an avid reader as well as a tireless traveller, interacting with people and learning from them. While he spent decades at the university teaching English literature, a great portion of his later life went on amid the indigenous people of the country. While he has a mastery of literature, language, linguistics, anthropology, history and many more subjects, he regards praxis as a higher form of human activity. Giving lectures within the classrooms and seminar halls is important to him but speaking truth to the power, unlike arm-chaired scholars, is far more important. In 2015, he was among the first scholars to return awards against the prevailing culture of intolerance within the country after the coming of the BJP/RSS-backed regime.

One of Prof Devy’s missions has been to protect the linguistic diversity of India. He considers the survival of many languages important for the survival of democracy. His thesis is that linguistic diversity acts as an antidote to the rise of authoritarianism. The same zeal for protecting linguist diversity encouraged him to carry out the People’s Linguistic Survey of India in 2010. The research work did documentation of around 780 living languages spoken across India. His commitment to the rights of the Adivasi community made him found the Bhasha Research and set up the Adivasi Academy in Tejgarh.

Recently Prof Devy along with his like-minded scholars published a book, The Indians: Histories of a Civilization (2022) to counter the Hindu Right’s agenda of communalising history. While the agenda of Hindu Right has been backed up by the state machinery, the project of Prof Devy was carried out with the support of the people’s support. The success of the book has further angered communal forces.

The cancellation of Prof Devy’s lecture is a part of the wider assault on democratic spaces within the academic institutes and outside. During the last ten years, a large portion of the democratic spaces created after decades of struggles has been squeezed. Besides, the autonomy of the public institutes has been attacked and their independent functioning has interfered to promote a particular ideology. In other words, the public authority and institutions have become undeclared spokespersons of the ruling ideology.

Worse still, the mainstream media is under huge pressure and is forced to sing praises for the current regimes and exclude the voices of the discontented. As a result, anyone who is critical of RSS/BJP ideology and is a firm believer in rational, secular and progressive values, has become a target under the current BJP and its allies-led regimes.

(The author is a Delhi-based journalist. He has taught political sciences at NCWEB Centres of Delhi University.)

Related:

Ganesh Devy’s lecture cancelled: IIT-Bombay

“Go beyond caste and religion when you’re thinking of getting married”: Cultural Activist Ganesh Devy

“Attack on Gauri Lankesh is On the Soul & Metaphor of Democracy”: Ganesh Devy

The post The Reign of Unfreedom: IIT-Bombay & the cancellation of the Dr Ganesh Devy lecture appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The cancellation of the lecture, originally scheduled for January 31, has raised concerns among students regarding the institute’s practice of calling off lectures.

Devy was first invited by IIT Bombay authorities to deliver a talk titled ‘The crisis within: On Knowledge and Education in India’ as part of the ‘Institute Lecture’ series. Students and faculty were informed a month in advance about the scheduled talk.

However on January 30, the eve of the event, authorities notified students and faculty members that the lecture had been cancelled due to “unforeseen circumstances.” A report in the Hindustan Times, states the committee “responsible for regulating lectures at the IIT Bombay campus made the decision to call off the lecture.”

“We were very excited to hear Professor Devy as he is an intellectual personality who delivers his thoughts on history and present society. We were very happy when the institute decided to invite him to the campus. But going by past instances, we feared that the institute may cancel the lecture,” said a student from the campus.

Professor Devy said, “I have never been previously associated with IIT Bombay. A professor from the institute’s lecture committee invited me to give a lecture. But a day before I was leaving, the same person called to inform me about cancellation of the lecture. I did not even bother to ask the reason as it is not my basic right. I have ample of pending work, so I utilised the time for the same.” However, he added that “Such last-minute cancellations do leave a bitter taste.”

“It is difficult for me to understand the motivation behind calling off the event. If I could deliver a lecture at IIT-Guwahati, another central institute, governed by the same regulations, then why not IIT-Bombay?” said Devy while speaking to the Times of India.

“I had sent them the synopsis of the lecture almost a month ago. The discussion over this started about four to five months ago and after a lot of deliberations on both sides, Jan 31 was finalised for the talk. The book that I was going to speak about is published and is in the public domain. I do not think this has anything to do with the content of the book or the topic of the lecture, nor do I wish to build a hypothesis around it. They are a scientific organisation, and I would like to believe that the reasons are not irrational,” he added.

Devy was the keynote speaker at IIT-Guwahati’s Graduate Research Meet in October last year and spoke on ‘Describing India: People’s Movements and Knowledge Production’.

Repeat cancellations at IIT Bombay

The institute had some months back cancelled a lecture titled ‘Israel-Palestine: The Historical Context’ by Professor Achin Vanaik in November last year as well as a two-day conference on Left politics titled ‘Cultures of the Political Left in Modern India’ in 2022.

At the time, after the lecture on the Israel-Palsetine conflict was cancelled, over 50 students had written a letter to the authorities saying that such cancellations were indicative of loss of academic freedom on the campus. “To restrict us from inviting academicians at the department or to allow the administration to intimidate us by recording our events is tantamount to destroying our academic freedom,” the letter read.

Besides, students from Ambedkar Periyar Phule Study Circle at IIT-B organised a reading of Devy’s book at the same time and venue on Wednesday, January 31 that was attended by around 25 residents on the campus including a few faculty members.

Related:

“Go beyond caste and religion when you’re thinking of getting married”: Cultural Activist Ganesh Devy

“Attack on Gauri Lankesh is On the Soul & Metaphor of Democracy”: Ganesh Devy

The post Ganesh Devy’s lecture cancelled: IIT-Bombay appeared first on SabrangIndia.

According to multiple media reports, huge banners and posters have cropped up along the campus showing that a religious procession named “Shriram darbar shobha yatra” will be organised on January 21. In addition to this, an email sent by the institute’s administration to all students and residents on campus on January 17 announced a musical event titled “Ramdhun”, inspired by the Geet Ramayan, is scheduled for January 20 at the IDC auditorium within the campus.

The poster may be seen here.

As per a report of News18, the said email sent by the institute’s public relation office read “It is a pleasure to share the announcement with you of a program, based on the celebrated ‘Geet Ramayan’, on coming Saturday, January 20 at 4:30pm in the IDC auditorium…The program ‘Ramdhun’, will present a selection of songs from ‘Geet Ramayan’ together with some ‘Ram Bhajans’. The performers are from IIT-B community, including the spouses and children of staff and faculty members as well as some students. Hoping to see many of you in the program.” The News18 report also provided that when their team contacted the institute’s spokesperson on the events, they denied holding any event officially.

The email may be viewed here:

The said events end with a gaushala being inaugurated on the campus on the day of the consecration ceremony of the structure in Ayodhya on January 22 by IIT Bombay’s Director, Subhasis Chaudhuri. As per the News18 report, another email approved by the administration addressed to campus residents on January 19 said that IIT-Bombay’s director Subhasis Chaudhuri will be inaugurating a gaushala on January 22. As per the internal event invitation, Ashwini Bhide, additional municipal commissioner, will be the chief guest at the inauguration.

According to News18, “The inauguration ceremony for the new gaushala is scheduled for January 22, 2024 (Monday)… Ashwini Bhide AMC (BMC) and Prof Subhasis Chaudhuri, director, IIT-B will be inaugurating it…”

News 18 is a channel owned by the Ambanis and is one electronic media outlet that has seen aggressive overtones of majoritarian reportage.

An internal invite email by Sudhir Shantaram Bhave, on behalf of the IIT-B cattle management committee stated: “As you all can witness, our campus, streets, grounds, academic, hostel and residential areas and various other activity locations are now free from uncontrolled cattle movement. This has become possible through the dedicated efforts of the committee in collaboration with the Cattle Welfare Group (CWG) and an esteemed NGO. This initiative of the institute, creating dedicated shelters and arrangements, helped in the enhanced management of cattle movement and the mitigation of cattle-human conflict. Since December 2019, gaushala activities have been managed in temporary sheds, albeit with certain limitations. It is with great pleasure that we announce the completion of our new improved gaushala in the picturesque lakeside area behind the Devi Padmavati temple. This milestone project marks a significant step forward in our commitment to the welfare of our campus environment.” According to the email, Gopal Rai, an IIT-B alumnus, and his construction company, Dhirendra Group of Companies (DGC) helped make the gaushala a reality. The said cowshed will a permanent gaushala behind the Padmavati temple near the campus’s lakeside.

The email may be read here:

Notably, in the third email shared on January 19, the institute announced a half-day closure on January 22, as per instructions by central government, till 2:30 PM.

These aforementioned events being organised at campus has attracted severe criticism. In response to these developments, the Ambedkar Periyar Phule Study Circle, a student collective at IIT Bombay, has raised concerns with the increasing alignment of the institute with “Hindutva political forces”, compromising its commitment to the values of secularism enshrined in the Indian Constitution.

The group also condemned what they perceive as the institute’s submission to right-wing political forces while suppressing activities of independent student collectives, shedding light on the use of contradicting “apolitical” guidelines to cancel academic talks and gatherings. As per these guidelines, which were issued on November 14, 2023, students and faculty are only allowed to only organise “apolitical” events at the campus.

The guidelines may be read here:

“The institute had very recently declared that it shall ‘remain apolitical in all its endeavours’ and has been using the new guidelines to cancel and censor several academic talks and gatherings on campus. It is shocking that the institute allowed such politically-aligned events to be organised while inviting all campus residents to it. The institute bows down to political forces while on the other hand it continues to suppress any activity by the independent student collectives,” said APPSC on their post on social media.

The guidelines for holding events on campus stated that these may be classified in two categories – “purely non-political’ and “potentially political”. The latter can cause socio-political controversies and must be avoided, it said.

The social media post of APPSC stated the follows:

“A line of events being carried out on campus by the IITB administration shows that it has started crawling in front of Hindutva political forces, giving up on the principle of Secularism in the Indian Constitution.

The institute has reportedly given permission to a procession called “Shriram darbar shobha yatra” happening on 21st January in campus. The Director will be inaugurating a Goshala on 22nd. Another musical event called “Ramdhun” will be happening on 20th.

Very recently though the institute had declared that its shall “remain apolitical in all its endeavors,” and has been using the new guidelines to cancel and censor several academic talks and gatherings on campus.

We condemn the surrender of this institute in front of the right-wing political forces while on the other hand it continues to suppress any activity by the independent student collectives.”

The post may be read here:

A line of events being carried out on campus by the @iitbombay administration shows that it has started crawling in front of Hindutva political forces, giving up on the principle of Secularism in the Indian Constitution. pic.twitter.com/DunAwQ8SEg

— APPSC IIT Bombay (@AppscIITb) January 19, 2024

Another highly regarded educational institute of Mumbai, namely the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) has taken adverse and unconstitutional steps in view of the approaching inauguration ceremony of Uttar Pradesh. As per a report of Maktoob media, a notice has been issued by the registrar of TISS Mumbai restricting their right to freedom of expression and speech, asking the students to not organise or participate in any public program opposing the Ram temple consecration.

The circular, which was published on January 18, stated that the administration had decided to officially prevent any such activities after having heard that a group of students were planning to protest against the Ram temple event as per Maktoob media. Students have been asked to refrain from any gatherings of dissent failing which the “law-enforcing agency” will take action against those who violate the warning.

“We advise all students not to indulge in any such unauthorised activities and we also strictly warn students not to participate in any such activities or demonstrations, failing which the law-enforcing agency will take necessary action against those students found indulging in such activities. Please take urgent note of the same and take care of yourself,” the notice read, as per the Times of India.

Related:

Journalist Aman Chopra casually visits a gaushala with sexual harassment accused Brij Bhushan Singh

Invites to Ayodhya temple inauguration extended to judges who gave the verdict in Babri Masjid demolition-Ram Janmabhoomi case

How and why the Ram Temple is just a political tool for the BJP  

Riddles of Ayodhya Ram Temple: Consecration of Bhagwan Ram’s idol, but which one?

From Ayodhya to Trivandrum, are Dalits still unsafe in India?

Three hundred Ramayans

Babri demolition to Ram Temple: A trajectory of Indian politics

The post Hindutva enters Mumbai college campuses- Gaushala, Shobha Yatra in IIT B, restriction to freedom of speech at TISS appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Faculty Forum of IIT Bombay on Tuesday issued a statement condemning the threats and attempts to both intimidate and tarnish the reputation of Professor Sharmistha Saha of the Department of Humanities and Social Science.

A group named the Vivek Vichar Manch has claimed that Saha and guest speaker Sudhanva Deshpande had glorified Hamas during a discussion after the screening of a documentary film — Arna’s Children — at the IIT last week. In a strongly worded statement issued to the media and reported by The Telegraph, the forum has stated,

“The faculty forum is absolutely distressed with the tarnishing of the reputation and physical threats to one of our colleagues via anonymous phone calls, and posts on Social Media platforms. The allegations made in social media about her supporting HAMAS or terrorists are based on misinformation and falsehood,” the statement by the Faculty Forum said.

The Forum also said that it had discussed the issue with Saha and that she had denied the allegations. The film was screened by her as part of an ongoing postgraduate course due to its relevance to the art of healing children who have gone through trauma. Arna’s Children is a 2004 documentary about The Freedom Theatre founded by two Jewish theater personalities. The film has won several awards at international festivals and is available for free on YouTube. Deshpande, a theatre personality, was invited as a guest speaker to introduce the relevance of the film to the audience and for the post-screening discussion.

Sabrangindia had published the statement of Sudhanva Deshpande last week where he had detailed the various domensions of the malicious campaign, drawing out the nexus between those “students” responsible for the social media campaign andelectronic media channels like Times Now. That statement can be read here.

Ironically, a\A student, who was not part of the course, recorded the lecture session on his mobile phone despite being asked not to do so. “During the entire session, our colleague neither expressed any opinion about terrorism nor did she express any opinion about HAMAS. She was not able to respond either to the film or to the comments made by Mr Deshpande because of the intimidating atmosphere prevailing in the class. The recording (which was made despite her explicit denial) was put up on social media posts and was also shown on some TV channels,” the Faculty Forum statement further added.

A few people claiming to be associated with the Vivek Vichar Manch shouted slogans at the main gate of the IIT holding large hoardings bearing Saha’s name and photographs. They accused Saha of being a traitor, issued death threats to her and called for her removal from IIT Bombay.

“The Faculty Forum of IIT Bombay strongly condemns the following: Calls to violence against our colleague, use of her photograph and name in the hoardings, tarnishing her reputation in print, TV and social media through biased information and false claims that she supports HAMAS and terrorism,” the statement said.

Related:

Right-wing group protests a talk on Palestine, demands faculty who organised event be arrested: IIT-Bombay

Filmmaker Sudhanva Deshpande releases statement accusing Times Now of spreading malicious misinformation against him

The post IIT-Bombay: Faculty backs professor over Hamas claims calling out the malicious campaign of misinformation & falsehood appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Deshpande, during his virtual lecture on September 6, mentioned Zakaria Zubeidi, a Palestinian activist who is currently in an Israeli prison, and designated the Palestinian  movement as a “freedom struggle.” Read Sudhanva Deshpande’s statement released after the controversy broke out here.

On November 6, a lecture was held at the Indian Institute of Technology Bombay (IIT-B) wherein a 2004 documentary film, ‘Arna’s Children’, made by Juliano Mer Khamis, an Israeli Jewish filmmaker, actor and theatre director was shown. As an introduction to the documentary, Deshpande had been invited to give a lecture by Prof. Saha. Certain students attending the lecture and otherwise have deemed the introductory lecture to be pro-Hamas and pro-violence. Furthermore, objections have been raised by some over the alleged glorification of “militant terrorists” by Deshpande. A complaint has now been registered against Prof. Saha, which questions the appropriateness of the professor’s actions in extending the invitation.

In his statement released on September  9, Sudhanva Deshpaande had explained, “ Zakaria Zubeidi is a former military commander of the armed wing of Fatah, the Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades. Fatah is the political party founded by Yasser Arafat. When I met Zubeidi in Palestine in 2015, he had given up arms and was advocating cultural resistance. He had highlighted the value of culture in the Palestinian freedom struggle. He co-founded The Freedom Theatre in the West Bank to fulfil his vision. I had referred to Zubeidi as a ‘visionary’, because in his conversation with me, he envisaged a future where the entire territory of historic Palestine would be a single nation, in which ALL its citizens — Arabs, Jews, Christians, and others — would have equal rights.

The protesters, which included Vivek Tidke, a leader from Vivek Vichar Manch, demanded the immediate arrest of both Deshpande and the faculty member, accusing them of “glorifying terrorists and their heinous acts.”

According to its own website, the Vivek Vichar Manch is an organisation “dedicated to constitutional values.” In addition to this, they also claim to have a wing called Sawarkar Smarak Adhyasan Kendra.

According to Sabrang India’s sources, the protest did not have more than 10 students, and the total number of protestors, including passer-bys, was about 100. This suggests, according to the source, that there is a sustained effort to designate the protest by the group as one that reflects the sentiments of the larger student community at IIT-B.

The group of protestors who have organised the protest has furthermore filed a complaint against Deshpande with the city police. Israel’s consul general in Mumbai, Kobbi Shoshani, too voiced criticism against Deshpande’s  remarks.

Shocking to read about the screening of a documentary of terrorists at @IITBombay.

I am happy that alert students and office bearers of @iitbforbharat caught them red handed.

I will be happy to visit there and share the real. https://t.co/3TZCMJZQAO

— Kobbi Shoshani (@KobbiShoshani) November 8, 2023

At the protest against the event, Ashok Tidke condemned the event at the IIT-B campus, questioning why such incidents occur in a place where students have earned “global recognition”. Tidke specifically denounced the support of terrorism and spoke about “brainwashing,” especially among students from rural backgrounds who could be swayed by such perspectives.

Conversely, the Ambedkar Periyar Phule Circle, IIT-B, released a statement on X on November 11, asking if the “politics of hate” has become so “easy?” The post also alleges that slogans such as “Goli Maron Salon Ko” (Shoot these rascals) were also raised at the protest at the institute’s gate. This infamous slogan has been used by the extreme Hindutva right-wing after the February 2020 violence in Delhi, especially aimed at vilifying the minority-led anti-CAA, anti-NRC protests.

A tiny group of students, along with right wing political groups outside IITB, has been attempting to create an environment of fear in IIT Bombay campus, throughout this week. Has this politics of hate became so easy and obvious @PMOIndia? pic.twitter.com/VtXBrRb6yG

— APPSC IIT Bombay (@AppscIITb) November 11, 2023

What is this all about?

Earlier, on November 6, a programme was organised at the IIT-B which featured a 2004 documentary ‘Arna’s Children’ by Israeli filmmaker Juliano Mer Khamis. Deshpande, who was invited by a professor, provided the remarks and an introduction for the documentary, according to Sabrang India.

On November 9, 2023, in response to the escalating controversy, Deshpande has further issued a statement defending his comments and decrying what he labelled a “disinformation campaign” against him; he even decried the Times Now programme which featured his comments and described him as sympathising with “terrorists”. He further clarified in his statement that Zubeidi, formerly a military commander of Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, had renounced violence and was promoting cultural resistance during Deshpande’s meeting with him in Occupied Palestine in 2015, stating “I had referred to Zubeidi as a ‘visionary’, because in his conversation with me, he envisaged a future where the entire territory of historic Palestine would be a single nation, in which ALL its citizens – Arabs, Jews, Christians, and others – would have equal rights.”

Another  lecture on the Israel-Palestine conflict by writer and academician Achin Vanaik was also cancelled by the IIT-B administration. The last-minute cancellation and the complaint against Deshpande sparked criticism from the student community, who condemned the incident as an attack on “intimidation” and a loss of academic freedom.

Related:

Filmmaker Sudhanva Deshpande releases statement accusing Times Now of spreading malicious misinformation against him

CJP sends complaint to Times Now Navbharat over debate shows giving communal colour to the Israel-Hamas Conflict

Withdraw FIRs filed against protestors for participating in pro-Palestine protests: PUCL

Israeli airstrike on Gaza hospital kills at least 500, Israel blame game continues

The post Right-wing group protests a talk on Palestine, demands faculty who organised event be arrested: IIT-Bombay appeared first on SabrangIndia.

IITs have been infamous for trying to ensure ‘purity’ of vegetarian spaces by forced segregation and penalizing ‘contamination’ by meat eaters for years. In 2018, IIT Madras had designated separate entrances, utensils and even wash basins for vegetarian and non-vegetarian students. In the same year, IIT Bombay also tried to enforce segregation by separation of plates for vegetarian and non-vegetarians, where non-vegetarians are not allowed to use the circular plates. In September 2022, mess caterers of Hostel 10 in IIT Bombay were fined Rs.50,000 for cooking vegetarian food in the stove designated for non-vegetarian food. In 2014, the HRD ministry  had asked the IITs and IIMs to examine demand for a separate canteen for vegetarian students on their campuses, as a response to a letter that claimed “non-vegetarian food leaves an adverse impact on person consuming it” and “leads the development of ‘Tamas’ (dark and unrighteous) nature”. Even before the ministry directed the IITs, IIT Delhi decided to go full vegetarian, where students claimed the prime reason was that many vegetarian students had expressed their displeasure at eating on the same table with non-vegetarians. Recently, Laxmidhar Behera, the director of IIT Mandi, had sparked controversy by urging students to pledge not to eat meat, claiming that non-stop butchering of animals is causing landslides and cloudbursts and this will lead to a “significant downfall” of Himachal Pradesh. In IIT Hyderabad too, the segregation of eating spaces was formalized this year.

In India, the relationship between people and their food habits is majorly determined by the hierarchical caste system. Historically, caste has played an important role in determining who gets access to ‘pure’ food and who are to consume ‘impure’ food. Members of the highest caste are said to be mostly vegetarians and does not eat meat which is considered impure (though there are numerous exceptions within the communities). If they were to eat or even touch meat, they would be declared to be corrupted and would have to go through numerous purifying rituals. Thus, associating meat as ‘impure’ and ‘polluting’ and those who does not eat meat as ‘pure’ becomes a symbolic way of reinforcing the superiority of savarnas over the others in the caste hierarchy. These concepts of ‘purity and pollution’ have influenced practices of food cooking, serving, eating and even of cleaning utensils.

Food has always been used by savarnas as a tool to show the marginalised their inferior place in the social hierarchy. Cultural hegemony using food has become more aggressive in schools, colleges, and offices in recent years. IITs have been historically dominated by savarnas, even now more than 95 % of faculties in IITs are savarnas, demonstrating their impunity in the brutal violation of reservation. But due to implementation of reservation, especially after OBC reservations in the past decade, the caste demography of a once majorly savarna student population of IITs started changing and is becoming more diverse. The demand for segregation and militant vegetarianism that we see emerging in the past decade is a way to protect and reinforce the cultural superiority of savarnas over the others. The savarnas (privileged castes) see the influx of Dalit-Bahujan-Adivasi (DBA) students into these spaces which they had been dominating for decades as a threat to their power. The administration of IITs, which are completely dominated by savarnas, fulfils this demand, and enforces this segregation with stringent penalties on the meat eaters, as seen from the imposition of Rs. 10,000 on the student protesting the segregation in IIT Bombay. Such a hefty fine for violating the rules of segregation is a modern form of untouchability, where mere presence of the Dalit Bahujans could ‘contaminate’ the ‘purity’ of savarna spaces. The food apartheid imposed on these campuses is a means to remind the DBA students that these academic spaces does not belong to them, that they are ‘dirty’ and ‘impure’, and they will be punished if they violate the rules of savarnas or question their casteist superiority.

In India, food is a marker of class, caste, religion, and even region. The hefty fine for a petty violation points the deep rooted casteism that is being enforced by the administration of these institutes as food apartheid. This strict segregation demanded by savarna students and enforced by the savarna administration seeks to reinforce prejudice against marginalized groups, by formally recognizing certain food as ‘pure’ and other ‘impure’.It is the casteist politics of pollution that seeks this institutionalization of untouchability.

In IIT Bombay messes, meat is not served as a part of regular mess food and students who want to eat meat must pay extra for it. In a country with more than 70% meat eaters, it is outrageous that the regular mess menu is fully devoid of meat. This is done to normalize the cultural dominance of vegetarians, despite them being a numerical minority. Special Jain counters are available in IIT messes to cater to their specific dietary requirements without any additional costs, but students who regularly eat meat, who comprises majority of the DBA students, do not get meat in their regular diet and are required to pay more. The savarna vegetarian food has become the norm even in canteens across institutes of higher learning and university dining spaces across the country. DBA students are sometimes forced to cook their food inside their room, away from the dining spaces out of fear of humiliation and abuse.

During a recent talk in IIT Bombay, Dr Sukhdeo Thorat, former chairman of UGC, clearly opined that educational institutions should not devise policy for segregation of eating spaces. Students can sit separately on their own, but institutions enforcing such segregation is promoting the casteist ideas of purity and pollution. Prof. Thorat emphasises that the decision of IIT Bombay to segregate eating spaces will further strengthen the idea of caste and pollution with food habits. “It must be recognized that what food to eat is the individual right of a person, but to treat vegetarians as pure and good and non-vegetarians as bad and impure and therefore both should be segregated from each other while sitting, is a wrong practice.”

The demand for segregation has not been raised by all vegetarians. They do not seek separate utensils, separate dining spaces and living spaces. Not all express disgust at the sight and smell of meat. Mixed dining is changing the ethics and aesthetics of food consumption in urban spaces. The caste-based superiority of Indian vegetarianism is facing a crisis and the rise of militant vegetarianism which feels disgust and anger at the very sight of meat shows this insecurity. Militant vegetarians seek to continually sustain this traditional (exclusivist) ethics and aesthetics of segregation and hierarchy in food consumption. There is also hidden anxiety among many vegetarian parents that their children might be attracted to meat, which leads to aggressive demands for the abolition of meat from all public and even private spaces. Casteist vegetarianism where savarna children are indoctrinated to hate the sight and smell of meat can be a subtle way of ensuring endogamy.

In an IIT Bombay survey conducted in 2021, even though more than half of savarna students responded that they do not want separate eating spaces or utensils, almost half (41%) demanded that they be provided separate spaces away from people who consume meat.

There is no end to this absurd segregation once sub-categorization begins where students are separated for eating garlic or no-garlic, sattvic, or egg-vegetarian. Such distinctions can multiply endlessly, fragmenting the community and undermining the very essence of unity and diversity. It can also extend to separate hostel rooms and other separation of spaces within educational institutes, which is not conducive to the inclusive ethos of an educational institution.

Dr Veena Shatrugna, former Deputy Director at the National Institute of Nutrition (NIN), Hyderabad, also questioned why people consuming milk, which is also derived from animals, has never been a source of contention. This reinforces the fact that the issue extends beyond the simple matter of dietary impositions but has to do with the larger context of caste prejudice. Such policies based on the casteist notions of purity is incompatible with the core values of scientific education. Segregation based on dietary choices sends a disturbing message to students that their food preferences define their purity and worth. This notion contradicts the essence of scientific inquiry and rational thinking, which should be central to any academic institution, particularly one that is supposed to teach science and technology like IITs.

Educational institutions should be transformative multi-cultural spaces where students have an opportunity to interact with peers from diverse backgrounds. These interactions lead to personal growth and intellectual expansion, recognizing personal privileges and unlearning prejudices. Food can be a unifying factor that fosters cultural appreciation and help people come together. Imposing segregation would impede this process of cultural exploration and hinder opportunities to utilize the diversity and unlearn biases. Instead, these practices contribute to further dehumanization and harassment of marginalized communities. Students belonging to DBA communities have been facing abuses and discrimination based on their food choices in these institutes.

A couple of months ago, a video clip of entrepreneur Sudha Murthy declaring herself a “pure vegetarian” and sharing her anxieties about sharing spoons with non-vegetarians when travelling abroad, went viral. Her comments led to outrage about ‘Brahmanical’ food segregation practices that have historically been used by savarnas to discriminate against oppressed sections of the population. Prof Ravikant Kisana, a professor of Cultural Studies, points out that her anxiety is not merely a food issue but a symptom of casteist prejudice and this mindset is not restricted to her alone.

In September 2017, a scientist from Indian Meteorological Department in Pune, filed a police complaint against her cook for violating her ritual purity because the cook did not ‘declare’ her ‘true’ caste at the time of appointment. She vehemently accused the cook of violating her hygiene standards and filling her kitchen with filth. This preference for savarna cooks and perception of brahmin or upper caste food as clean and edible is the manifestation of a deeply engrained hatred towards DBA and the persistence of untouchability.

Power dynamics of caste creates and perpetuates the belief of superior and inferior food cultures. Smell is used a means to ostracize and demonize DBA communities as causing a civic nuisance. The food consumed by DBA communities is portrayed as ‘dirty’ or ‘smelly’ to reinforce the dominant narrative of ‘pure’ vegetarian food.

This is visible in exclusive housing associations restricted strictly to vegetarians and the savarnas. Here, cooking and eating meat are presented as a civic nuisance that disturbs the peace and aesthetics of the place. This justifies the exclusion of people who cook and eat meat to maintain the savarna status quo and food culture.

Food intolerance is prevalent when searching for places to live. For instance, even landlords, neighbors and housing associations find the food cooked by DBA and religious minorities in the privacy of their homes, “stinky and revolting”. Savarna landlords uses the dietary habits to turn down residence to people belonging to DBA communities. Neighbors often raise complaints about cooking meat and such fights often become regional.

Three Jain trusts and one individual moved the Bombay High Court to demand a ban on meat advertisements, on the grounds that such advertising was a violation of their right to life, to live in peace, and to their privacy. In the earlier case, the high court had stated that being vegetarian or non-vegetarian was a personal choice and no meat shop could be ordered to close for the comfort of vegetarians. In this instance, the high court stated to the petitioner, religious trusts that there was no law in the land that could be evoked to ban meat ads.

Dr Sylvia Karpagam, a public health doctor and researcher, talks about Exaggerated Vegetarian Fragility Syndrome becoming associated with the constant promotion of vegetarianism in India, which reinforces the perceived superiority of those who consume vegetarian food. It also has long reaching impact in public health policies in a country like India, which has a high malnourished population. The demand for removal of meat and egg from noon meal programmes of government schools can adversely impact the lives of millions of children, especially those belonging to DBA communities and stunt their physical and intellectual growth.

Demonising meat and meat eaters plays an important role in maintaining the savarna hegemony in these institutional spaces. Assertions from DBA communities are necessary to challenge this dominant narrative of savarna superiority. Academic spaces should not succumb to militant vegetarianism and try reinforcing caste superiority. These spaces should instead encourage mixed dining where people can come together shedding their prejudices and learn about different cultures. These educational spaces should invest in scientific temper and higher learning that celebrates diversity, not hierarchy.

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are the author’s personal views, and do not necessarily represent the views of Sabranginia

Also Read

Indian Institutes of Savarnas: Graveyards for Marginalised Students

Related:

Another student, belonging to the Scheduled Caste community, dies by suicide in IIT

Even after paying, no provision stands for providing health insurance to IIT Bombay students: APPSC

Systematic Entrenched Caste Discrimination in IITs is depriving young students right to dignity and life: PUCL

The post Segregation of Eating Spaces: Modern Untouchability in IITs appeared first on SabrangIndia.

A post from APPSC IIT Bombay on Twitter said, “There is no medical insurance policy for students at @iitbombay even though students pay Rs. 1750 as medical fee and Rs. 250 as insurance fee. The procedure for availing of medical expenses is completely arbitrary and opaque. Despite the promise of making a proper document, nothing is done.”

The post further said, “As a result of fee hike protests in August 2022, it was agreed by administration that the current system was arbitrary and opaque. It was promised to students that a medical insurance policy document will be prepared and circulated soon.”

The post can be viewed here:

Notably, a previous RTI (Right to Information) petition filed by the APPSC revealed that 19 of the 23 IITs have dedicated cells for the welfare of historically marginalized Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (SC-ST) students, out of which, sixteen remain inoperable. According to RTI data received by the APPSC, 18 cells have no funds allocated, and 16 have not held any events after August 2022. IT is essential to note that IIT BHU, IIT Kharagpur, IIT Hyderabad, and IIT Bhubaneswar are among the 16 institutes.

Related:

“Highly appalling to see SIT ignoring rank caste discrimination Darshan faced despite overwhelming evidence”: Ramesh Solanki

How many lives will it take before India acknowledges dominant caste hegemony in educational institutes?

Lessons Unlearned: Nine years after the Thorat Committee report

The Death of Merit: Dalit Suicides in institutes of higher learning

Systemic Prejudice, Absence of Grievance Redressal reasons for Dalit Suicides: Teacher Testimonies

A letter that should shake our world: Dalit scholar suicide triggers outrage

Rohith Vemula’s ‘institutional murder’: Five years on, family and friends still wait for justice

Why have India’s elite institutions sounded the death knell for Dalit Adivasi-Muslim scholars?

IITs unable to create safe spaces for students

IIT Mumbai report on Darshan Solanki death, crucial evidence overlooked

The post Even after paying, no provision stands for providing health insurance to IIT Bombay students: APPSC appeared first on SabrangIndia.

During the conference, Darshan’s father narrated the difficulties they have had to face since the death of his son, to get the case registered, to get the investigation started, and then to have the Special Investigation Team (SIT) formed. He also spoke about how, even after the investigation started, the caste discrimination angle was not given much attend, and was rather left on the side lines while the focus became the sole student who was being blamed in this case. Ramesh Solanki had termed it to be “highly suspicious” that the SIT in this case had ignored all the testimonies that point to the fact that “Darshan was facing caste discrimination” from his roommate, classmates and other people in the institute and was deeply affected by it.

Providing the chronology, during the conference, Ramesh Solanki said that upon Solanki’s death, the Powai police registered an Accidental Death Report (ADR) instead of an FIR inspite of “evidence of caste discrimination” and started investigation. However, after mounting pressure and demands of the constitution of a Special Investigation Team to investigate the matter, the Maharashtra Government formed a three-member Special Investigation Team (SIT) consisting of Lakhmi Gautam, Joint CP (Crime), Mumbai; Upadhyaya, DCP; Bhosale, ACP, to investigate the case.

Janvi Solanki then provided that in the second week of April, she stumbled upon Darshan’s social media accounts while trying to log into social media and came across Darshan’s chat with an account of “Sam Rajput” on Instagram. As was provided in the press conference, it was through social media only that Janvi got to know that Darshan’s peers had been asking about his rank, his category for admission, and Darshan’s apprehension about another person ‘also’ not liking him.

“It is telling of the fact that in Darshan’s experience in IIT-Bombay, people stopped liking him after they learned that he was a reserved category student. It is yet another evidence of caste discrimination he faced in a line of so many that have already been revealed, showing that he was isolated, taunted and ostracized due to his caste,” Dr Mungekar said, as provided by the Mid-day.

Ramesh Solanki expressed his anguish by saying that even after new evidence was provided, in addition to the many submitted testimonies regarding the caste discrimination that Darshan faced in IIT-Bombay, the focus of the investigation was never the caste discrimination that Darshan faced. Ramesh Solanki further provided that Darshan even wanted to change his room because of the harassment he faced from his roommate. His peers mocked him for his questions about the know-how of computer, electronic gadgets and other subject matters, he said.

“On knowing Darshan’s caste, they ostracized him, reduced their interaction with him, and humiliated him for belonging to the SC category. Darshan had confided to his sister Janvi that when his peers learned that he is from the SC community, they would call him out and say… ‘dalit aaya..dalit aaya’ (look, the Dalit is here) when he would try to join them during group studies or meal hours. His classmate from the SC category has mentioned to the IIT-Bombay internal committee that Darshan was sensitive about his caste and often thought about what others would think about a reserved category student studying in an institute like IIT Bombay,” the family said in a press release after addressing the press conference.

The full press release can be viewed here:

Related:

File FIR against Head Counsellor, Ms Hima Anaredy under Atrocities Act: NCST to IIT Mumbai

IIT Mumbai report on Darshan Solanki death, crucial evidence overlooked

How many lives will it take before India acknowledges dominant caste hegemony in educational institutes?

Lessons Unlearned: Nine years after the Thorat Committee report

The Death of Merit: Dalit Suicides in institutes of higher learning

Systemic Prejudice, Absence of Grievance Redressal reasons for Dalit Suicides: Teacher Testimonies

A letter that should shake our world: Dalit scholar suicide triggers outrage

Rohith Vemula’s ‘institutional murder’: Five years on, family and friends still wait for justice

Why have India’s elite institutions sounded the death knell for Dalit Adivasi-Muslim scholars?

IITs unable to create safe spaces for students

MP: Dalit boy dies by suicide, blames teacher’s casteist remarks

REPLUG: Rohith Vemula, Your Sacrifice was Not in Vain

The post “Highly appalling to see SIT ignoring rank caste discrimination Darshan faced despite overwhelming evidence”: Ramesh Solanki appeared first on SabrangIndia.