This suo moto action was highly fishy in the first place. How many HCs take up cases based on a single Instagram post? Why did the bench not acknowledge the fact that the inquiry report nullified the entire case? Under what law is "queerphobia" an offence? Why were there comparisons to NUJS student bodies with no relevance to the matter at hand other than the judge's son being an NUJS student? Why was the Registrar forced to apologise for denying instances of sexual harassment after a report proved there were no such instances?

Oddly, anytime there's a post about this matter, 3-4 comments with very similar writing styles pop up calling for the Registrar and Director's exits. Reeks of an agenda.

You're clearly pushing an agenda here. The HC has had to stumble and eat its own words in every hearing in this matter. The inquiry report was a bust and there was quite literally no evidence of an incident of sexual harassment. Which is precisely what the Registrar stated in court. The Registrar was chastised for claiming no incident occurred before the inquiry was over, so in essence he was vindicated.

Registrar gets scalped and not the Director? No way the Registrar acted independently. What's the value of the affidavit filed by the Director? He is supposed to apply POSH Act/Rules and relevant UGC Rules in both letter and spirit.

If the Gujarat HC CJ's son is in NUJS shouldn't she have better idea about how NLU admins actually function. How did she miss the hoodwinks by the univ and state admins? Still, she is on a better wicket.

Look at how NLUJ played the HC and SC with the alleged murder case. Or IIT Kharagpur playing the Cal HC.

I remember LI pursue the story on GNLU Review Commission Report. Prof Menon (individually as a member) was scathing, which was a surprise since he was seen as an establishment man. Later GNLU had someone 'worthy' dilute those things and it was business as usual. Something similar happened with NALSAR, who got the state bar chief to whitewash (Only LI carried that story; where did Kian disappear?). Later he became a HC judge and retired as a CJ. Got some cushy sinecures too.

NUJS had its first review commission after 15 years! Wonder why the "stalwart trio" never bothered with the statutory obligation. Worse, why did the worthies including the Chancellor, gracing the GC/EC never bothered. Be that as it may, under student pressure the review took place. Whatever little "criticism/reality" seeped into the Report was due to intrepid students.

The Report snowballed into PIB and Co exits. Here too an Assistant Prof was handpicked as Registrar. But with PIB exit, he was smart enough to read the writing on the wall. So, he scooted and was later brought back by NKC. Maybe the potential of review reports to cause regime change had a chilling effect.

But the regime change had no effect on NUJS' terminal slide. Revival is unlikely if the usual business rules apply, which likely will.

https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/gujarat-high-court/gnlu-registrar-issues-unconditional-apology-to-gujarat-high-court-for-initially-denying-harassment-allegations-257314

After this will GNLU continue with the current director? What's the point of having an EC with state govt, UGC/BCI, HC and SC worthies when institutional rot is allowed to entrench?

Kindly remember how the first review commission report upset the apple cart? While things were "ironed out" its has been eons since another review took place (many NLUs never underwent the statutory reviews). Then again, does review commission reports really solve anything?