Read 89 comments as:
Filter By
After the dark era of P Ishwara Bhat, college was doing well under NK Chakrabarti and Raja Chakraborty as registrar. However, students whose were being disciplined have resorted to protest. VC is trying really hard to improve academic quality and evaluation pattern. Nowadays students don't want to study only need degrees and placements. Shameful. In solidarity with Hon'ble VC Sir.
They particularly hate them being denied the rate to make out in classrooms and the academic block. That's why they have recently started breaking the locks of terraces.
Makes zero sense to lock the terrace. Moreover, everyone collectively took up the responsibility for breaking the locks. The registrar himself said that they won't put up locks again.
Everyone collectively taking up responsibility is merely a ploy so that disciplinary action cannot be taken against anybody despite them having committed an actual crime. Look at your own justification: it doesn't make sense to lock the terrace, so we will break the locks.
We will break the locks and would never comply with tyranny. Deal with it, admin itself said that they would not put up locks anymore. So yeah, our methods were successful.
Okay, now that you have revealed yourself to be a degenerate and troll, there is no point in engaging further with you. If you behave the same way in your studies and work, then it highly unlikely that you will see success in the long term.
Not just me, but a clear majority holds such a sentiment and that has been proven by the 373 signatories of both the mails.
Of course. Illegalities never lack supporters, especially when they benefit from it. Doesn't make the offence legal still, unfortunately for you.
If you're so concerned about "illegality", feel free to approach law enforcement over it. Admin won't restore terrace locks, unfortunately for you and your pro-admin acolytes who would never dare to voice such opinions publicly.
If you're so concerned about me voicing my opinion here, go and file a complaint under the Digital India Act.
Considering that the university is not yet run by a popular referendum that has replaced law and regulations, that number means zero.
In practice, it doesn't mean zero :)

Most of our demands were met, and our methods were successful. We aren't going to back down, rant about it as much you want on anonymous forums.

Signed, GH resident batch of 2028.
What has happened to those to "collectively took up the responsibility?" Nothing, which was exactly what the plan was all about. So now you have shown that you can commit crimes provided you collude and work together. Congratulations, that's how mob lynchings work too in principle.
Of course. Because everything that the students want is gospel and everything else becomes "pro-establishment". Pandering to student demands is what have brought this institution's academic culture to the brink of disaster. The perception of everyone including alumni today is that academics doesn't really matter at NUJS. You people are the reason why.
Nobody ever makes out on the terraces. Almost never. Why wouldn't they just go their rooms instead if they're bothered enough to sneak into the hostel? You clearly don't study here so stop peddling nonsense
From nobody to almost never in two consecutive sentences. Shows the state of your legal and logical acumen. This is why you should start attending classes.
Sir/Maam,

Unfortunately, you seem to have no knowledge about why this protests are taking place. So, it would be great if you keep your opinions to yourself.

Love,

Concerned actual stakeholder.
The protests were mainly because some guards and mashis were given show cause notice as some students had broken the terrace locks in both the hostels. This comes along with a long line of unfair treatment of the workers who are fired and their basic rights are often not met. Plus the grand viva which has been introduced suddenly which would require students to study their entire course and give it in front of all their subject teacher in one day itself had been introduced arbitrarily in the middle of the session with no consideration for the internship plans of students. Moreover there is a lot of anger against the register for introducing several regulatory changes without any proper procedure and off-course the usual infrastructure deficiencies which someone take forever to solve.
Will the students who have taken 'responsibility' for breaking the locks also accept the disciplinary action that should follow such crimes? Or does their armchair activism only extend to writing emails? Of course the guards should be show caused for locks having been broken. Their job is to prevent it from happening or taking immediate action by reporting it to the authority. You are so comfortable with indiscipline and anarchy that you have now started normalising it.
WTF is wrong with a viva? If you want to pass a subject you should know the whole syllabus and be ready to answer questions on it.
Newsflash: Students are supposed to study for all the subjects throughout the semester. The viva was happening one week before the exam and one month after all classes were over. If you don't study, that's not other people's fault.

Unfair treatment against workers? Since when have the students treated the workers fairly? Just a week ago, false complaints were being made against the guards because the latter dared to interrupt students making out in the acad block. Your biggest problem is that you refuse to realise that your actions have consequences. You will vandalise university property and then expect to go scot free. If the guards are not stopping you from doing that, then yes they too are complicit, even if they do it out of fear. Did you have the guts to own up for the crime? All you took is the cowardly way out of writing mass mails with 200 people accepting 'responsibility' but certainly not the possibility of any disciplinary action against you. There are universities from which students have been expelled for such offences. After all that you will come crying asking for special treatment. Get your own act together first.

As for proper procedures, the Registrar certainly knows better about procedure than you do. Taking students' permission is not part of any university procedure, even if your seniors tell you otherwise. You guys don't study, wish every rule to be bent to suit your selfish interests and keep focusing on petty issues to divert focus away from the real issues like infra deficiency. People like you are responsible for there not being any real or systemic change.
So many people signing on the emails clearly indicate that a supermajority of the GB is against such nonsensical restrictions. And of course you can say these things only behind the mask of anonymity on LI. You would never post it in the campus group.
Supermajority of GB supporting vandalism and crime does not make it more legal. It just goes to show that your legal education is deficient and that you're wasting your parents' hard-earned money. Why not tell them your glowing activities and see how they take it? They are funding your education, after all. Or will they simply ignore it saying boys/girls will be boys/girls?
Agreed. In solidarity with โ–ฎโ–ฎโ–ฎ โ–ฎโ–ฎโ–ฎ who is being targetted for just asking students to not enter her office in shorts. You won't go to law firm offices or advocate offices in shorts, then why enter teacher's offices.

These students should be punished heavily with fines.
Agree. The teacher does not have the right to insist about it within the whole campus, but in her office, certainly yes. These students are hypocritical. They themselves will meekly dress up for the interviews, internships and moots.
Going to a professor's chambers on campus =/= interview/internships. She cannot arbitrarily make up her own rules when we have no such dress code on campus.
In your eyes, it isn't. However, you are not the arbiter of rules. You do it because you think that moot judges or firm partners will throw you out and you are scared of that. The professor is also allowed to do that from their room. To the professor, their room is their office. They are allowed to set the dress code in their office. You are merely setting standards based on your convenience. You are not mandated to go to their rooms, after all. Don't go if you don't like the rules. Any rational individual will consider that fair. Clearly, you aren't one.
It is one thing if there is a general norm for how to dress in teachers' offices. Largely, there isn't because any professor with sense knows that college is the time for students to explore their identities. These analogies make no sense. Tomorrow, a professor may throw a student out of their office for not wearing black and white and say but you would wear it in court. Or for not wearing a sari and say but you would wear it at a wedding. If it is okay to wear something on campus, it is okay to wear it to a professor's office. They should not work in a workplace with young people if they have such conservative sensibilities.
Once again, you choose to respect your rights but not that of others. There is a difference between classrooms and one's personal chambers. If you have such hypocritical mentality, then you don't have to go visit the faculty in their own chambers. Students want to experiment, why don't they try that during moots, which are actually arranged by the students and is entirely a make believe world, or during interviews within the same campus?
There doesn't have to be a general norm. It's an individual choice of the teacher concerned. If you wish to meet them there, you have to respect that right. If you don't want to, then don't go there.
How is it different, exactly? Only law firm people have the right to demand that you dress professionally in campus and the teacher doesn't?
โ–ฎโ–ฎโ–ฎ. A senior professor has this policy of not letting anyone enter her chamber wearing shorts. She has this clear policy that wear anything you want during the class, but whenever you enter my chamber, you won't be allowed in shorts. She says it's my chamber and my rules would apply, you won't be allowed in these casual dress in any professional set-up. Whatever maybe your subjective views, but I don't think there's anything wrong with her reasoning, it's her chamber, and she can impose these restrictions.

Moreover, the culture of NUJS to stop anyone voicing a different point of view is worst. A student tried to speak of why the teacher had such views in the first place, he was bashed like anything in the college group. So much so that this junior year student won't even dare to speak against the popular perception ever again. Why do you want to go in hot pants in a professor's room? There were 100s of students being stopped earlier, but this time โ–ฎโ–ฎโ–ฎ was stopped, that's why all the fiasco. It's the professor and the VC who are tolerating such things to pile up, this behaviour of grow-up students should not be tolerated.

Thank You!

Never in support of such activism
Kolkata reaches 43 degrees with 80 % humidity so the feel like temp reaches close to 50 Degrees, full pants is madness
So why aren't you seen wearing those during Day Zero, or while mooting? Go ahead, normalise that, instead of making teachers easy target. Every person has a right to set down basic rules in their private space. The teacher's own room in the campus is her private space. You've got a problem with the rule, then don't go into that room. Interact with them in class and leave it there. While you are at it, might as well start wearing vests too instead of t-shirts. Helps with the humidity.
Some people are too keen to enforce Victorian notions of morality, surprisingly the same who cry about Westernization of younger generations.
Some people are only too keen to accept such Victorian notions when it suits their interest. Or are you going to turn up for Day Zero in shorts too or during the next competition? Only those who are willing to do that have got the moral right to protest against this.
Then wait for that to wear pants and don't go to meet the teachers in their chambers otherwise.
The teacher has the right to demand that students dress properly when they come to meet teachers in their rooms. Students are not being prevented from wearing whatever they wish to while in class or the acad block in general. Only hypocrites protest against this and then dress formally during moots, interviews and while meeting law firm partners within the same space. This is a non-issue that is being deliberately fanned by one student who has got multiple disciplinary proceeding against herself, loves to cut corners whenever it suits her interest, and likes to fashion herself as a victim and self-styled leader.
You expect a person to go to hostel wear full pants, sweat their ass off, then come back to the teacher, that takes 30 minutes to do, you really want to waste that much time just because a teacher who is sitting comfortably in her ac room wants to see some full pants, and when the person reaches the teacher they will be long gone,
If you don't have that much time to 'waste', then you don't have to meet the teacher. It's not a compulsion. Same way that you don't have to moot or appear for an interview or intern, but if you do, then you would have to wear pants. To you the former may not be worth making such an effort for. The teacher has the right to expect that you would.
Dude, now you are just sounding whiny and childish. If the teacher is sitting in her AC chamber, you too are sitting in your AC classrooms.
Completely agreed. A professor trying to impose decorum in a professional space is completely justified and valid. Itโ€™s really concerning how these woke people tried to label this as sexual harassment.
How is it sexual harassment to ask people not to wear shorts when they are entering someone's private chambers? If anything, them insisting on wearing it while getting in can be considered sexual harassment, especially when the teacher is a female.
The professor has a shared office and the student had gone to a different faulty for some work. There was no reason for this person to interject and humiliate someone who did not even come to her/him. Moreover you canโ€™t compare an internship/moot court with meeting a professor. As per the official policy there is no dress code so no professors cannot unilaterally make rules themselves. Also she wasnโ€™t even a stakeholder in the situation. I think poking in your nose in a situation you have no stake in is more indecent than showing some legs.
The other faculty accepts those rules too, so long as he is not giving you directions to the contrary. And yes, the dress code is for the public space, not teacher's personal chambers. She can very well do that for the same reason why you need to knock and take permission before entering those chambers. But you lock breakers and vandals won't really know anything about such basic courtesy of course. She is not a stakeholder? It's her chamber that they were in! This is what happens when you just parrot certain words without knowing their meaning.
its sad seeing the new batch instead of fighting for their rights are supporting this ridiculous thing, in my time i cannot even think of this happening, by your logic very soon you will expect the students to attend class in suits and polished shoes because of decorum, what are you on dude
Classroom is open and public space, as opposed to private chambers of the teacher. At this rate, you would advocate for appearing for Day Zero in shorts. Oh, wait, you never will cuz that will get your thrown out of the room without a job.
Yes, now you reveal your true colour. So it's not a matter of rights at all, but jobs. Very well then, go for your jobs without meeting the teacher. Nobody is forcing you to meet them, are they?
Day Zero is once in 5 years and it has much higher priority, meeting teachers happens for students every single day, im sure some students love to clear their doubts and ask questions 3-4 times a week, so meeting teachers should be as casual as possible, and also the teachers offices are shared, what about the other teachers their who don't care about it like normal people, so meet the normal people in shorts and go hostel and change your pants and meet the specific teacher ? i'm so scared of these people supporting this, i'm actually terrified that they care so much about what people wear, and these people are so delusional that they think day zero and meeting the teacher is the same, this is really scary
Once again, it is not about the clothes but the effort that goes behind those as you and others have proven in this thread only. If people from law firm can expect you to put in effort and appear presentable while meeting them, so can your teacher. You keep skirting the issue about them having the right to receive students in their chambers. They aren't demanding that you wear pants in the classroom where you have a right to be in. They are asking for that in their personal chambers. You seem to be all about your rights but the moment that others' rights are mentioned, your receptivity suddenly dries up. You are the law student whom others should be afraid of, really. What you have proven clearly is that you are ready to respect moot judges' right and law firm partners' rights and wishes, but not your teachers'. That's the reason this institution is failing. You don't respect your faculty but expect them to be at your disposal giving you every break. If you are asking them to give their time outside class to you, then you have to respect their wishes. Otherwise get your questions addressed during class where you can choose not to wear pants.
Very well said. This is exactly what these people masquerading as woke fail to understand. Being woke is about respecting other people's rights too, not only your own.
They aren't same to you and that's the bigger problem. Both the people can expect you to turn up presentable, but you think that only one's wishes matter.
You should dress in beach clothes while attending classes. That should also be okay from your logic.
It's just one 4th year toxic student who has been showcaused multiple times and was even thrown out of RPC who is having problem. She must be fined heavily
No, you aren't. This is about the teacher's policy, not the lock breaking. And 370 law students supporting an illegal action is nothing to brag about, by the way.
The amount of misogyny and patriarchy on this thread is just mind-boggling. You people belong to Gen Z and have a problem if girls wear shorts? WTF is wrong with you? Are you guys from a 17th century village? No wonder NUJS has become such a toxic cesspool of right-wing bigots. Next you will be defending sati.
So let me get this straight. When you're wearing pants during interviews or competitions, which role you are playing exactly? The right wing bigot, or the sati defender? You are basically showing hypocrisy without a shred of principle. Teachers are just soft targets for you. Which is why you are now trying to paint this as against women, when the teacher's policy is gender neutral as everyone knows.
Not only that, none of the boys to whom the faculty has told the same thing never had any problem with it either.
[Next you will be defending sati.] he he a good example of strawman argument (I dont have any stake in the thread)
One of the faculty members has spoken against a referendum being conducted by students to decide evaluation pattern for themselves. Shameless students selected a viva pattern where questions would be given out of a question bank of 20 questions per subject which everyone would rote and score full marks. Finally a faculty member has spoken
Yeah now the VC himself is supporting this system. Instead of this manufactured drama, the old system was much better.
Mod, this is not contested. Formal emails have been written by as many as six faculty members now on this issue.
A 12-word comment posted 1 week ago was not published.
A 77-word comment posted 6 days ago was not published.
A 135-word comment posted 6 days ago was not published.
A 24-word comment posted 5 days ago was not published.
A 55-word comment posted 5 days ago was not published.
A 106-word comment posted 4 days ago was not published.
A 16-word comment posted 3 days ago was not published.