NLU Tripura: Students Challenge Registrar Appointment Statutory Basis

• Students at NLU Tripura accused the administration of safety and governance lapses, sending an anonymous letter to multiple authorities on September 14.
• Key allegations included the in-charge Registrar's appointment lacking a disclosed statutory basis, financial disclosures falling short of RTI Act requirements, and absent faculty.
• Students also reported venomous snakes in the Girls' Hostel, withheld answer scripts, and the absence of a grievance mechanism under NLUT Act Section 16(ix).
• VC Prof (Dr) Yogesh Pratap Singh dismissed some concerns as "routine" and referenced the former Registrar's resignation in May 2026 following sexual harassment allegations.
• The former Registrar, Prof Nachiketa Mittal, made "certain admissions" before his resignation, which the Executive Council accepted.

The student letter explicitly questioned the legitimacy of Dr Jayanta Dhar's designation as in-charge Registrar while simultaneously holding the position of an Assistant Professor, alleging that no statutory foundation for this appointment had been made public.

Students at the National Law University, Tripura (NLUT) have brought forward serious accusations against the university administration, citing significant lapses in both safety protocols and overall governance. These concerns were formally communicated on September 14 through an anonymous letter addressed to the President of the Consortium of National Law Universities. Copies of this critical communication were also dispatched to several key stakeholders, including the university's Chancellor, the Vice-Chancellor (VC), the Bar Council of India (BCI), the University Grants Commission (UGC), and the Higher Education department of Tripura, with the students demanding a response within a ten-day timeframe.

The student letter detailed a range of specific grievances. Among these were claims that venomous snakes had been discovered within the Girls' Hostel premises, with no subsequent remedial actions taken by the administration. Furthermore, students alleged that evaluated answer scripts were being withheld from them, impeding their access to crucial academic feedback. The communication also highlighted a perceived deficiency in the university's financial transparency, stating that disclosures fell short of the requirements stipulated by the Right to Information (RTI) Act. Adding to the concerns, the students claimed that certain faculty members listed on the university's roster had not been present on campus for a period of four years.

In response to these widespread allegations, Professor (Dr) Yogesh Pratap Singh, the Vice-Chancellor of NLUT, characterized several of the students' concerns as merely "routine" issues commonly encountered by universities. However, the students' letter specifically challenged the appointment process for key administrative roles, pointing to the in-charge Registrar, Dr Jayanta Dhar, who was an Assistant Professor at the time of his appointment. They asserted that this appointment lacked any disclosed statutory basis, raising fundamental questions about the university's adherence to established governance procedures.

A central point of contention in the student complaints revolves around the NLU Tripura Registrar appointment statutory basis. The anonymous letter explicitly questioned the legitimacy of Dr Jayanta Dhar's designation as in-charge Registrar while simultaneously holding the position of an Assistant Professor, alleging that no statutory foundation for this appointment had been made public. This particular allegation underscores broader NLU Tripura governance allegations, suggesting potential deviations from prescribed institutional norms for critical administrative roles.

Further compounding the governance issues, the students' communication highlighted the absence of a formal grievance mechanism, specifically referencing Section 16(ix) of the NLUT Act. This alleged oversight points to a potential gap in the university's internal processes for addressing student concerns and complaints effectively. The involvement of bodies like the BCI NLU Tripura oversight, as a recipient of the student letter, indicates the gravity with which these governance and compliance issues are being viewed, potentially inviting external scrutiny into the university's administrative practices. The allegations concerning financial disclosures falling short of RTI Act requirements also bring into question the university's commitment to transparency and public accountability.

The Vice-Chancellor's response to the student grievances began by referencing a significant prior administrative event: the resignation of Professor Nachiketa Mittal, who previously served as the Registrar in-charge. Professor Mittal's departure occurred in May 2026, following a period during which he faced sexual harassment allegations. This historical context, brought forth by VC Singh, provides a backdrop to the current administrative challenges and NLU Tripura governance allegations.

According to VC Singh, Professor Mittal had made "certain admissions" prior to his resignation. Subsequently, the university's Executive Council formally accepted Professor Mittal's resignation. This sequence of events, preceding the current student outcry, suggests a period of administrative flux and challenges within the National Law University Tripura administration, potentially contributing to the broader environment of concern among the student body regarding institutional stability and adherence to proper procedures.

The allegations at NLU Tripura underscore the critical importance of transparent and statutorily compliant administrative appointments within educational institutions, particularly concerning the NLU Tripura Registrar appointment statutory basis. The students' direct appeal to multiple regulatory bodies, including the Bar Council of India and the University Grants Commission, highlights the potential for these issues to escalate beyond internal university matters, inviting broader regulatory oversight and intervention. The concerns about financial disclosures and the alleged lack of a grievance mechanism under the NLUT Act further emphasize the need for robust institutional frameworks that ensure accountability and provide avenues for redress.

These events serve as a significant reminder that adherence to statutory provisions for key administrative roles, coupled with transparent financial practices and effective grievance resolution systems, are fundamental to maintaining institutional integrity and student trust. The ongoing scrutiny of the National Law University Tripura administration, encompassing issues from campus safety to governance and transparency, reflects a broader demand for accountability within higher education and the critical role of student voices in bringing these issues to light.

This report serves as a critical reminder for lawyers advising educational institutions to review their internal governance, particularly regarding statutory appointment procedures for key administrative roles and compliance with financial transparency obligations under the RTI Act. It also highlights the necessity of robust grievance mechanisms to mitigate administrative challenges and potential regulatory scrutiny.

Source: Original reporting via Bar and Bench