The selection process isn’t gonna stop ya. Committee is formed, the there gonna do their job. It won’t be about what Baxi wants either, he’s one very old guy on a committee.

I can’t imagine Baxi thinking FM is some great scholar, but I do think reasonable people can see that FM is better than the other guys.

You can’t prove a negative. You can’t prove that there is no corruption for the same reason you can’t prove that other nalsar professors aren’t in a criminal syndicate. If you’re gonna allege corruption, prove corruption. This insinuation crap is fooling no one. It’s not unethical or improper for him to speak his mind on this just like it’s not unethical or improper for you or me to. Faculty and teachers are not just service providers, they’re equal members of the academic community with an e yal voice. Just because you don’t like it - doesn’t mean it’s improper or unethical or any other damn thing.

His position is not nuanced at all. He is clearly asking for FM to be retained. Not that FM should be allowed to compete with other candidates and prove that his candidature is still the best for NALSAR. Given that stance, all the other LinkedIn activities really appear as an eyewash.

You keep going back to the same assertion without explaining why. If chauhan thinks that extending FMs term is the best thing for the university, and he can give you reasons- that’s entirely his right to do so. It’s not unethical. It’s not unethical for teachers to tell students what they think. These students are adults, a good number of them can and have disagreed with him in the past. They’re not being pressured into anything.
It’s not unethical to say that maybe indulging this selection process is not the best thing for the university. It’s not unethical to do any of this. Do you even know what ethics are ? Or did you just use the word as a stand in for “ I don’t like it”.

If you want to allege that Sid C or any prof at nalsar is corrupt. Make that allegation, show people proof. Don’t insinuate stuff like that while avoiding any responsibility for actually proving things.

For the record chauhan did post the ad for VC on his LinkedIn asking other academics to apply so there is a strong competition a while back. His position is a lot more nuanced than you’re giving it credit for.

'In Search of Justice' seems to be [...]. This is getting tiring. This is now the third faculty member I have spotted here (four if you include former faculty like [...]) who is posting here anonymously. If all you can do is to cryptically suggest improprieties in some recent appointments, how on earth can your grievances be resolved here? If you are seriously 'In Search of Justice', you should raise these points in the faculty meetings or write to the Executive Council of NALSAR. Or at least have the integrity to openly debate this issues with the likes of Sid.C. who has directly and publicly expressed his views in support of FM's continuation? IMHO, many of you ([...]) have seriously undermined your own reputation in the eyes of the students. Anonymous mudslinging will not help your case.

Comment 9 is absolutely wrong and shows the high levels of desperation, especially among our most incompetent and dishonest faculty members . We can also guess the identity of the person (named after [...]). There is no connection between the SBC representation and the alleged inaction against drugs. Do you think that 565 students will sign a letter endorsing FM because a few 1st year kids are facing disciplinary proceedings? If you remember an incident 4-5 years ago, several students were suspended for one year and two were even asked to leave the college after they were caught. Even in the most recent case from March 2022, the wardens have already recommended suspension of the students who were caught. What else do you want? Public caning or flogging of young adults?

We have signed the representation for a simple reason. There are hardly any decent candidates in the running this time. Many of the people who are openly targeting the NALSAR VC position have done a less than convincing job at their current institutions. One of my classmates has already outlined the main points earlier in this thread. If there are good academics who want to apply, please encourage them. Don't resort to false propaganda against the few good teachers that we do have. As we are taught in debating, even if you are in opposition, learn to make constructive arguments.

It seems that the 'Agent of Freedom' is either [...] or someone else directly coached by him. He is miffed that he was not named among the ad-hocs who will become vulnerable in case of a leadership change. The truth is that he will be more vulnerable than the ones whose names have been taken. And why should he or others (temporary or permanent) look for alternatives when there can be stability at NALSAR? That is our simple point. If there are other good candidates for the Vice-Chancellor position, why don't you name them or at least encourage them to apply?

Once again, it is unethical for someone to lobby for the continuation of a superior to the exclusion of others under the guise of institutional well-being. I did not say that others do not have agendas of their own. Merely that if a teacher says that only one person can help an institution do better and he should not even have to compete with other contenders for the post, and then the teacher tries to get students to support his cause, then that is unethical, even if it common. People ask more from Sid because people expect more of him. As for him seeing flaws in Faizan, as his subordinate he can hardly do anything about those, so that is not really relevant here. Him simply arguing that Faizan can do a better job and hence should be allowed to compete with others wouldn't have been unethical, but him claiming that nobody else should be allowed to compete definitely is.

Let us present the other side. while FM and Dhanda have improved the academic infrastructure. a lot has happened which this author has not shed light on.. let’s start with the ad hocs. a lot of them were promised regularisation in one year. didn’t happen. most are planning to move irrespective of whether FM stays or not. second, this author has conveniently left the name of One who is still on the rolls of Nalsar. she is leaving for NLS. not because she is afraid!! But NLS offered her tenure which Nalsar never did. this idea of faculty being afraid is something stooges are selling because their hands are in deep mess. The caretaker of NALSAR is intending on staying because he will be one among many at NLS. he won’t be able to pull off resources the same way he pulls it here at NALSAR. this author has conveniently left the name of another ad hoc who has been a vociferous critique of this existing regime in open..the salaries of ad hocs haven’t increased in the last 5 years. one ad hoc was regularised after 9 years. Bdw. his 9 years won’t be counted as experience. he was denied on the same premise which another lady was regularised (having and not having a phd).

There are RTIs files against the university for granting extension in a dubious manner to its ex professor. there are writs because the fellow is 59 and still an Assistant Professor. teachers - the one this author has written against are mistreated in meetings..

And here we have the ‘liberal brigade’ saying that the university will go to the wrong hands. if there is change. if this is not a clear case of Fascism what is? The Shepard is ‘guiding’ his sheep well.

This author has pulled off a classic ‘batch of 2022’ - ethics for others, liberalism for its own.

Yes this is exactly what is wrong in how you're all thinking about what a VC should do. A VC is not supposed to referee your petty squabbles, he's not supposed to decide on every deadline extension, every hostel rule, and every instance of disciplinary or academic infraction/ misconduct. There are deans and wardens and administrators for that. Look up the UGC regulations to understand what a VC should be, it says persons of the highest level of competency, integrity, morals and institutional commitment should be chosen who are distinguished academicians. FM is barely one of those things. He has done nothing to show intellectual leadership. He has built no systems to delegate all these petty squabbles ( other than Mata) because he/they enjoy the popularity he/they gains with students by providing them with easy sops instead of holding them accountable. Tell me one research center at NALSAR that can compare with what centers at NLS, NLUD, and even JGLS are doing? tell me one funded grant FM worked on? One scholarship /fellowship he negotiated and got for NALSAR students?Why is the only thing nalsar can brag about lately that they have hundreds of youtube videos of scholars from other institutions delivering lectures? tell me one research project FM headed? Tell me how many quality associate professors has he hired? how many has he retained? how has he even helped faculty development at all? when was the last time that there was an academic review of the teaching curriculum? Has FM even managed to hold to account these scam professors who his people are now lobbying against? or has he let them profit as long as he gets to do the same?
how does this matter you ask? unfortunately having professors who know and are interested in academic work trickles down, it means students get to work in clinical programs that aren't a sham, it means students get to assist with research projects that are actually taken seriously in the world and have an impact. It means students have more than two professors whose recommendation letters can get them into graduate programs they want. It means students actually learn banking law when they learn banking law. Yes it means there will be less time to smoke pot and party it up, but it also means there more competency, integrity, morals and institutional commitment and academic excellence.

Do I think the other current contenders are going to be better than him? likely not. Do I think that the 67% of nalsar students should demand more of FM before casting their vote for him? yes. In any case, there's no doubt that the position of the VC has been bastardized, and once those expectations are lowered it is very hard to remember what you've lost. it is like playing chess with a pigeon, the bird will crap all over the board, and then strut around like it won the game. Keeping FM comes with significant costs.

Dear Guest,
We agree with your main point that ideally the next Vice-Chancellor should be a strong academic. However, it is also important to be a fair-minded administrator while running a residential institution which requires balancing the interests of faculty, students and staff on a daily basis. In our minds, Faizan Sir has done a good job on this count. Furthermore, applicants for this position need to have served as full Professors for at least 10 years on the date of the advertisement (April 12, 2022). Out of all the names that you have mentioned, only Prof. Srividya Ragavan (currently at Texas A&M University, earlier at Oklahoma University) is eligible since she has been a full Professor since 2009. If you know her, please request her to apply for the NALSAR VC position.

Many of the other names that you have mentioned will be great candidates for the Vice-Chancellor positions at the various NLUs in the future. I personally hope that someone like Arun Kumar Thiruvengadam or Mrinal Satish will apply for NALSAR in 2027. Maybe some of the diaspora candidates will also consider applying then. Till, then Faizan Sir is a good bet to preserve the gains made over the last decade. What we do not want is a regression for the institution.

As a NALSAR student, I can say with complete confidence that this is true. The “senior-most” faculty (with the only notable exception of the Constitutional Law professor) have not contributed to institutional building at all - and have always catered to their self-interests and power.

The most recent developments, including one by filing a frivolous petition in the Telangana HC against the appointment of Prof. Baxi onto the search committee shows the extent to which this camp goes to secure their self interest.

The institution means nothing to them, power and greed is what they’re driven by:

It helps if the VC is a good scholar or at least if they care about scholarship. But a great scholar who is a bad administrator will kill a university. That whole job is managerial. It is stupid to compare it to a CEO of a company but it does need some management skills. A VC who write great books but keeps fighting with the faculty and outsiders, encouraging internal feuds and failing to keep the state government and judges happy is a bad VC. But poorer quality books with excellent people skills will work.

Thank you! Of all criticisms of FM and Sid C, this one is the most convincing. There’s no denying that nalsar has suffered academically and stagnated where NLS and NLUD have grown.
The VC can hire people to do the administrative work. But you need someone with a vision for how to improve the university to head the institution.

It’s not unethical to have interests. He’s being vocal about the reasons he wants FM to continue. He thinks they’ve done some good work, he thinks that FM needs to remain for that work to continue. He isn’t an acolyte who would refuse to see flaws in FM. If you want to allege that he is being disingenuous and he’s actually receiving favours for advocacy- make that claim.
People who want FM out also have interests. And guess what? Students also have interests- they could want an administrator who goes easy on them, relaxes academic standards, or they could want a VC who will push the institution in the direction they want. And guess what- people on the selection committee also have interests- they have political inclinations and regional loyalties and their own favourites within the academic world.

Anyone who told you that having an interest should disqualify you from advocacy did not educate you. I didn’t just attend law school, I graduated very well.

It’s not on the face of it unethical for chauhan to advocate for FM any more than it is for you or I to tell others our opinions. If you want to allege that sid chu and FM are corrupt- do that.

People here are making the mistake of differentiating between a good scholar a good administrator. For an educational institution, the VC must be a good scholar with high-quality publications and research. This is not a company which needs a CEO to do managerial tasks or a PR manager to do publicity, but a scholar to show intellectual leadership. Thus, people like Faizan Mustafa should never be VC. Instead, NALSAR should follow the example of Law School and pick a Law School alum who is a good scholar, like Sudhir. The choices are many. From abroad, there is Shyam at Penn, Tarunabh at Oxford, Prabha at KCL, Rahul at SOAS, Srividhya at Texas A&M, Neha at EUI etc etc. From India, there is Arun, Sarasu and Rahul at Law School, Anuj and Mathew at Jindal, Lawrence at Ambedkar, Anil at IIMB etc etc. Such people will raise the academic standards of NALSAR, which is languishing in third place in NIRF, behind Law School and NLUD.

The distance education programs did very well and are an example of administrative skills. The core intellectual property courses were being taught by Unni who Vivekanandan supported and mentored unlike many 'good' faculty who were constantly running down their colleagues. He was a chair professor and focused his energies on his centre, international networks for the very new university and the distance education program that also built its reputation while bringing in money. That is what you want in an administrator - humility, collegiality and enterprise. Not arrogance and sharp elbows. Many great teachers are terrible administrators. Some have a problem with every single one of their contemporaries and they had a problem with Ranbir Singh as well. HNLU junior faculty would not know details about Vivekanandan's Nalsar tenure just as current Nalsar students wouldnt know details about his time at Nalsar. Don't believe these half lies being thrown around by insecure people.

It is clearly a toxic situation and debate. This comment contains details and assumptions that suggest heavy faculty involvement in creating this narrative. There is no reason to assume that Rao or VCV cannot do the job or that they would not retain junior faculty. Both have great networks. Prof. Faizan did many good things but everyone's term comes to an end. The yardstick cannot be who will make a single faculty member comfortable, however good she may be. She will need to learn to get along with senior faculty and vice chancellors. Instead of slinging mud at all the candidates without exception, this conversation should be who would be good for Nalsar and help it grow in new ways.

So basically you are saying that Faizan has failed during his term as VC to demand and get accountability from certain people and therefore he should be trusted again to keep failing in that? The same logic that you are giving about some people wanting admin duties and power (never known any honest academic who actually wants those) can be used against Dhanda, Sid etc. too. They want the power that they already have, hence they are lobbying to keep the one person who will keep giving it to them. If Dhanda and Sid are doing such a swell job for the institution, why not trust a new outsider to recognise that on his own?

It is unethical to lobby for your current superior to continue without giving other people the chance to apply because the supposition is that you are receiving or will receive favours from him in ways one or more. That much is obvious to any student of law. Are you sure you are one? He is not asking that FM also be allowed to reapply along with others, but demanding that FM is the only guy who can save the place from, well, what FM himself has turned it into! That's as suspicious a logic as it gets.

That’s not the argument. For reasons I’ve outlined above, I don’t think it’s unethical at all for faculty to lobby and speak openly about who they want to see heading their institution. Faculty have a huge stake in making sure they get a boss they can work with. That may mean good and bad things for the institution- there are good and bad reasons- but that shouldn’t preclude faculty from speaking up about this. Don’t shift the burden. Y’all said it was unethical- tell us why it’s unethical. Go beyond the assertion right?

We have spoken to many alumni over the last few weeks. There is no support for V.C. Vivekanandan. He is already the Vice-Chancellor of HNLU Raipur. Perhaps some of the junior teachers appointed by him at HNLU are posting comments here in his favour, hoping that they will get to move to NALSAR if VCV gets the top position. Let us be honest. From what we have gathered from our seniors, V.C. Vivekanandan was hardly taking any classes for the Intellectual Property courses that he claimed to teach at NALSAR in the early 2010s. He was mostly busy with Distance Education Programmes and Conference Participation. Nothing wrong in that, but a teacher should not neglect his core responsibilities. All the other three names have crossed 65 years of age and will hence not be interested. If you know of good academics who meet the eligibility requirements, please request them to apply.

For senior alumni and other well-wishers of the institution, Sidharth Chauhan's actions may seem pre-emptive and unjustified. However, those who are aware of what is going on within the institution over the last few months, will easily see why he has publicly come out in support of Prof. Faizan Mustafa's continuation as Vice-Chancellor for one more term. Even since our Chancellor (Hon'ble Chief Justice of High Court of Telangana) ordered the initiation of the Selection Process in December 2021, a certain group of entrenched faculty members have been saying all sorts of unparliamentary things in the open.

At least 8 faculty members (appointed during the terms of Ranbir Singh and Veer Singh in the 2000s) have openly said that after Prof. Faizan Mustafa's term ends, they will also remove Prof. Amita Dhanda from the Professor Emerita position given to her last year. They also want most of the internal administrative roles (Academic Chair, Exam Chair, Charge of the various Committees) to be handed over to them. Unfortunately, these are the same faculty members who have been misusing their seniority for many years. With the exception of one Professor who teaches Constitutional Law, all of them habitually cancel most of their classes, do not provide any feedback/support to students, habitually plagiarise work done by junior faculty and students to beef up their publication records, besides doing nothing to help in improving the public profile of the University. Many of them cannot even prepare their lessons properly and 5th year/LL.M./Ph.D. students acting as Teaching Assistants do a better job than them. Since they are all in permanent positions and have considerably seniority, Prof. Faizan has found it difficult to get constructive work out of them. He has acted on student feedback and removed most of them from core subjects. Now the very same people are abusing Prof. Faizan, Prof. Dhanda and Sid.C. through anonymous comments on this forum. It is like the worst people in the organisation rallying against the best.

Since taking over in 2012-2013, Prof. Faizan has hired several good people. Many are carrying on at the institution while some others have left for better-paying alternatives or funded Ph.D.s. Faizan Sir could have done more to improve faculty hiring and retention. However, it is still a fact that our faculty strength is now around 55 people, which is double of the strength that was there when he joined in April 2012. We verified this information by browsing through the Annual Reports and University Records. Out of these 55 people, 15 are recent hires (both in Law and Management) who are currently in contractual positions. Most of them are much better teachers than the older lot which is now mobilising against FM-Dhanda. However, a change of Vice-Chancellor will make this group very vulnerable since contractual teachers can be removed without reasons. Among the younger teachers, there are people like Chinmay Deshmukh, Prerna, Niharika, Pranav and Rahul whose future would be very uncertain under a hostile Vice-Chancellor. Furthermore, there is now a strong middle-group of teachers (which Sid.C is part of, along with people like Neha Pathakji, Sourabh Bharti, Rajesh Kapoor, Agni Sir, Sudhanshu, Murali Sir, Manisha Ma'am) who are thorough with their subjects and genuinely care about the future of the students. This middle-group will also be dislodged from the internal administrative roles. In short, a regime change at this point will really destabilise the institution.

Among the middle and younger group, many competent teachers are likely to leave NALSAR within a few months if FM is succeeded by a below-par Vice-Chancellor. Most of the candidates who are expressing their interest in the Vice-Chancellor position (Sri Krishna Deva Rao, V.C. Vivekanandan, V. Balakista Reddy, G.B. Reddy, Shashikala Ghurpur, Surya Prakash) do not inspire much confidence when it comes to what needs to be done over the next five years. They simply do not have the networks or the range to take NALSAR forward. At least four out of these six prospective candidates cannot even deliver lectures properly and have a history of favouritism and resorting to short-cuts.

As final year students, we have to do what we can do protect the future of the institution. We have already taken the lead in submitting the letter to the Search Committee. We will now reach out to alumni across batches and appraise them of the internal situation. As for Sid.C, he has an offer to go back to NLSIU this year. He can easily re-locate to several other private law schools which will give him a better salary and a better balance between teaching and research. If he had 'vested interest' (as alleged below), he could have left NALSAR years ago. Knowing him, he will do whatever he can to protect the future of NALSAR. Now it is time for students and alumni to come together and express our views in the right forums.

why exactly is it unethical? almost every faculty member is rooting for someone or the other? Why hate on Sid C for being transparent about what he thinks is the best and giving his reasons for it? Is it because the other side cannot give reasons for why they support their candidates?
Does he take some monkish vow of silence because he's faculty? couldn't one argue that given that faculty spend more time at the institution than any individual student and have more loyalty to the institution than anyone outside of it that they should have a say in who they have to work with?
This appointment system is only so messed up- its not how its done in all the law schools nalsar aspires to be.

At a personal level, I appreciate SidC for his uprightness in being able to say this out loud. Maybe he can [...] answering some simple questions and extending his argument in favour of FM. Hope he finds this worthy of his reaction unlike some other comments.

1. Was due process followed in the appointment of [...] ? Were the members of committees kept in dark regarding the financial hit that the university had to take because of this?

2. How did [...] get appointed as Assistant Professor (in [...]) while it is no secret that her application was maliciously inserted into the bunch of applications long after the last date for receiving applications was over? How was the workload calculated? Are subjects like History and Sociology considered part of English at NALSAR?

3. On what grounds were [...]'s regularisation done even though she had not fulfilled the requirements as had been laid down in her appointment order?

4. For what reason are university staff including our techstar I, engaged for days and months in providing university time to ensure VC par excellence makes personal YouTube videos?

These speak volumes of administrative failures, [...]. Hope you can provide some insights [...] so that we can also see light at the end of the tunnel.

Shame of the faculty with vested interest.

They are trying to replicate what happened with Sudhir in NLSIU by going public with the process.

Faizan is yet to answer following points -

1. Why has no reply been filed by VC against the allegations made by a faculty through a case which is pending in Hyderabad High Court?

2. The shameless groping incident happened in NALSAR.

Chauhan should also mention the 'BACK SCRATCHING' arrangements through which the so called support of 67% students has been secured.... institution has gone to pack of Dogs (some great some lesser). The soul of the institution has been sold out.... discipline gayi tel lene.... Students were caught with Ganja. What action was take in this regard??? These guys have stooped to such levels that they are giving such freebies for this Sham support. Mind you, NALSAR is supposed to produce great lawyers, not misguide students towards the path of Junkies....

Maybe FM is not interested? Maybe he is eyeing a bigger post, like VC of AMU or a Rajya Sabha ticket? These are more influential than being VC of NALSAR (which is a state university until NLUs are nationalised).

I personally think a Rajya Sabha seat is possible. There are a few vacant seats coming up.

It is a very unethical step for a faculty member to openly lobby for the institutional head in this manner. He could have asked that a person equal to Faizan's stature and efficiency be appointed as head and if nobody like that could be found, then Faizan could be reconsidered for continuation. But what he is doing is not really cricket. More was expected of Sid Chau. I'm sad because I really like and respect him as an academic and teacher.

Nalsar prof Sidharth Chauhan said:

Quote:

the present student body has submitted a representation to the Search Committee on April 24, 2022, requesting that Prof. Faizan Mustafa should be considered for re-appointment to the position.

This representation has been signed by 565 out of 840 full-time students, amounting to nearly 2/3rd of the present student body. I am attaching the text of their representation as a PDF file. We seek your help in publicising this statement so that it is read by external stakeholders in the judiciary, bar and academia.

I personally believe that Prof. Faizan Mustafa's continuation at NALSAR will be beneficial for the institution's further growth. Not just because he gave me a job here in 2013, but also for his pragmatic decision-making and consistent contributions to public awareness about our legal system. The student's statement sets out the reasons in a more elaborate manner.

Full representation below:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21748321-sbc_representation_for_nalsar_vc_appointment