Caste Discrimination At National Law University: Allahabad HC Chief Justice Recuses From Special Appeal

The Allahabad High Court Chief Justice Arun Bhansali on Tuesday recused himself from hearing a special appeal against a single judge bench order directing two judicial officers from Prayagraj to inquire into allegations of caste-based humiliation and discrimination made by two students of Dr Rajendra Prasad National Law University, Prayagraj.

A division bench of Justice Siddhartha Varma and Justice Kunal Ravi Singh, on September 23, 2026, had stayed further proceedings in the petition filed by a PhD research scholar and a fifth-semester BA LL.B. student of the University, seeking an inquiry into their complaint against Dr. Deepak Sharma, head of the Department of Law and warden of the boys' hostel.

The division bench had observed prima facie that the inquiry should have been conducted through the University’s Equal Opportunity Cell rather than by judicial officers.

The bench had also directed that the special appeal be placed as a fresh case on September 29 before an appropriate bench. In pursuance of the direction, the special appeal was placed before a division bench comprising Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Kshitij Shailendra.

However, the Chief Justice-led division bench ordered that the matter be listed on October 7 before another bench of which the Chief Justice is not a member.

Why had the high court division bench questioned the judicial officers’ inquiry?

Through its September 23 order, the division bench of Justices Varma and Singh had noted that the University had an Equal Opportunity Cell and, more importantly, the students themselves had sought that the Cell inquire into the matter after excluding Dr. Deepak Sharma.

Therefore, the bench observed that there was no occasion for an inquiry to be conducted by judicial officers.

"Even if the allegations are of a serious nature, the power of the University to examine such allegations through an appropriately constituted Equal Opportunity Cell ought not to have been taken away, as it is within the domain of the University to look into the welfare of the students and deal with situations as they arise," the division bench had observed.

However, taking note of the fact that the inquiry report by the judicial officers was due to be submitted by September 24, the division bench had directed that if the report had been prepared, it be placed in a sealed cover before the bench hearing the case.

The division bench had also refused to stay the single judge bench's direction relieving Dr. Sharma from all administrative responsibilities till completion of the inquiries.

The bench had said that since it had only examined the scope of the inquiry and the regulations, it was appropriate that the prayer regarding Dr. Sharma's administrative responsibilities be examined on the next date of hearing.

What are the caste-based humiliation allegations made by the students?

The petitioners alleged that the Head of the Department of Law and Warden of the Boys' Hostel had used his academic and administrative authority as an "instrument of caste-based humiliation and retaliation".

One of the petitioner students had submitted a complaint to the Vice-Chancellor on August 20, alleging, among other things, that he was being subjected to stricter evaluation because of his caste.

He said he had secured the highest marks in Constitutional Law-I, which is a gold medal subject, and alleged that a remark made by Dr. Sharma at the beginning of the fourth semester was an indirect reference to his performance.

The complaint also alleged that Dr. Sharma had made public remarks concerning caste and reservation, including, "Tum to achchi family se ho, tumhe reservation kyo chahiye?"

The student sought an independent review or re-evaluation of his Constitutional Law-II and other answer scripts. He also requested confidentiality, citing concerns that raising the allegations could affect his academic environment and future opportunities.

What had the single judge ordered?

On September 16, 2026, while hearing the students' petition, Justice Vinod Diwakar had observed that since the allegations were serious, they required to be examined by an impartial agency.

Accordingly, Justice Diwakar had directed the University Vice-Chancellor to constitute an independent committee to re-evaluate the students' answer sheets in subjects taught and evaluated by Dr. Sharma, as well as any other subjects indicated by the students.

Moreover, Justice Diwakar had directed two judicial officers from Prayagraj to inquire into the allegations of caste-based humiliation and discrimination.

Case Title: Dr Deepak Sharma v. State of U.P. and 6 Others

Order Date: September 29, 2026

Bench: Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Kshitij Shailendra