Why Protests Continue at Panjab University — Even After the Government Reversed Its Governance Reforms
“The rollback may have calmed the storm, but the clouds of mistrust and unresolved questions still hang over Panjab University.”
A Reversal That Didn’t End the Unrest
In a surprising move, the Government of India recently withdrew its controversial order to restructure the governance of Panjab University (PU), Chandigarh — but the protests on campus haven’t stopped. Students, political leaders, and faculty members continue to rally, demanding assurances of autonomy, transparency, and immediate elections to the University Senate.
The Ministry of Education had issued a notification in late October 2025 proposing sweeping changes to PU’s governance framework. These included altering the composition of the Senate — the University’s highest decision-making body — and redefining the Syndicate, which handles its executive affairs. The stated goal was to align PU’s administration with the principles of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, focusing on “modern governance and efficiency.”
However, critics quickly accused the government of attempting to centralize control over one of India’s oldest and most symbolically significant universities. The backlash was swift and intense, prompting the Centre to rescind the order on November 7, 2025. Yet, despite the rollback, the agitation continues.
What is the significance of the PU Senate?
The Panjab University (PU) Senate is the supreme governing and policy-making body of the University, responsible for the overall management and superintendence over its affairs, concerns, and property.
- Role and Responsibilities
– Supreme Authority: The Senate is the highest authority of the University.
– Policy Making: It is responsible for making policy decisions regarding the University’s governance, finance, and long-term development.
– Oversight: It has the power to review the recommendations of the Syndicate (the executive body) and the Academic Council.
– Elections: The Senate traditionally elects members of the Syndicate, the Finance Committee, faculty committees, and deans.
– Appointments: The Registrar, a key administrative officer, is appointed by the Senate.
What the Withdrawn Order Proposed
At the heart of the controversy lay the government’s proposal to shrink the size of the Senate from around 90 members to roughly 30. The revised structure would have sharply reduced elected representation, particularly eliminating or curtailing the graduates’ constituency — the alumni and registered graduates who traditionally vote in university elections.
Many seats would have been converted into nominated or ex officio positions, thereby giving greater influence to administrative officials and the central government’s appointees.
Supporters of the move argued that such reforms would make PU more streamlined and less encumbered by political wrangling. But detractors saw something else entirely: a threat to the democratic spirit and autonomy that have defined the University since its post-Partition re-establishment in Chandigarh in 1947.
Why Protests Persist Despite the Rollback
While the official order has been withdrawn, the protests haven’t died down — and for good reason, say the protesters. Their discontent runs deeper than one notification.
1. A Question of Democratic Representation
Student groups argue that the proposed restructuring reflected an attempt to dilute democratic governance within the University. For decades, PU has stood out for its participatory model — where students, teachers, principals, and graduates all have a say in its highest bodies. The idea of replacing elected members with government nominees sparked fears that the institution’s voice could be muted by bureaucracy.
“The university’s autonomy is non-negotiable,” said a representative from the Panjab University Campus Students’ Council (PUCSC). “Rolling back the order doesn’t change the fact that this mindset — of control rather than consultation — still exists.”
2. Federal and Regional Concerns
The controversy also took on a political and federal dimension. Panjab University, though located in the Union Territory of Chandigarh, has deep cultural and historical roots in the state of Punjab. Political parties — from the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) to the Congress and Shiromani Akali Dal — criticized the Centre’s move as an “assault on Punjab’s educational heritage.”
They argue that the attempted changes undermined state participation in the University’s governance, setting a precedent for central interference in other regional institutions. Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann called it “a matter of Punjab’s pride and autonomy” and vowed that the state “will not rest until the university’s democratic character is fully protected.”
3. Broken Trust and Delayed Elections
Even after the reversal, there’s a lingering sense of mistrust. Protesters point out that the Senate’s term expired in October 2024, yet no fresh election schedule has been announced. They suspect that the delay is deliberate — a way to keep the University in a state of administrative limbo while alternative governance plans are explored behind the scenes.
“Until elections are announced, the rollback is only cosmetic,” said one student leader. “We need action, not promises.”
4. Symbolism and Stakes on Campus
Beyond administrative politics, the issue has become a symbol of student empowerment and the defense of academic freedom. For many, the battle over the Senate’s composition is about preserving the University’s identity as a space where diverse voices — from faculty to alumni — can influence academic and policy decisions.
Student organizations have intensified their demonstrations, occasionally shutting down classes and campus gates to press their demands. Faculty associations and alumni groups have also joined, calling for transparent elections and a reaffirmation of PU’s semi-federal governance model.
More Than a Campus Issue
Panjab University’s governance tussle has evolved into a broader debate about university autonomy and the balance between reform and representation in India’s higher education system. It highlights the tension between efficiency-driven central reforms and the need to preserve participatory traditions that give universities their distinct character.
For now, the government’s reversal has only paused the controversy, not resolved it. The protests, while peaceful, underscore a powerful truth: restoring trust requires more than withdrawing a notification — it requires genuine dialogue, democratic action, and respect for the voices that make a university truly alive.
CitiTimes 