The Allahabad High Court has stayed proceedings in a writ petition concerning caste discrimination allegations at Dr Rajendra Prasad National Law University in Prayagraj, finding that the complaints should be addressed by the institution’s internal mechanisms rather than judicial officers.
A division bench comprising Justice Siddhartha Varma and Justice Kunal Ravi Singh issued the interim order while hearing a challenge brought by Deepak Sharma, the university’s Head of the Department of Law and warden of the boys’ hostel. Sharma appealed against a single judge’s earlier ruling that had assigned external judicial officers to investigate the matter.
Internal Cell Affirmed as Proper Forum
In its September 23 decision, the division bench observed that because the university maintains an Equal Opportunity Cell, there was no justification for assigning the inquiry to judicial officers. The judges noted that the original petitioners had themselves requested an investigation through that internal body, provided Sharma was excluded from the proceedings.
The bench emphasized that the university’s authority to review such grievances through an appropriately formed Equal Opportunity Cell should not be displaced, even in the presence of serious allegations. The court stated that overseeing student welfare and managing campus disputes falls squarely within the institution’s administrative domain.
Origins of the Dispute
The case stems from formal complaints filed by two students: a doctoral research scholar and a fifth-semester B.A. LL.B. (Honours) student. Both alleged that Sharma leveraged his administrative and academic authority to subject them to caste-based humiliation and retaliatory measures.
Following those grievances, a single-judge bench had intervened on September 16, 2026, directing an inquiry by Archana Singh-I, Judge of the Small Cause Court, Prayagraj, alongside Arun Kumar Yadav, Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Prayagraj. While making clear that it was not passing judgment on the truth of the claims, the single judge determined that the severity of the allegations required an examination by an impartial authority, setting a submission deadline of September 24.
Upcoming Hearing and Report Status
Sharma subsequently challenged the single judge’s order before the division bench, arguing that the existence of the campus Equal Opportunity Cell rendered a judicial inquiry unnecessary.
The division bench has directed that if the inquiry report from the two judicial officers was finalized in line with the earlier deadline, it must be submitted to the court in a sealed cover on September 29, when the appeal is scheduled for its next hearing.
