Questions over Nepal-based experience claim cast shadow on Assistant Professor appointment process at Mahatma Gandhi Central University

By Sagar Suraj

MOTIHARI: Fresh controversy has surfaced around the ongoing faculty recruitment process at Mahatma Gandhi Central University (MGCU), with allegations relating to the authenticity of an experience certificate submitted by Dr. Sneha Chaurasia for the post of Assistant Professor drawing attention within academic circles.

Documents accessed by Border News Mirror (BNM) indicate that Dr. Chaurasia had submitted an experience certificate purportedly issued by a Nepal-based management college, claiming nearly seven years of teaching experience. 

However, an independent verification conducted by the newspaper has reportedly raised questions regarding both the duration of service and the salary details mentioned in the document.

Sources associated with the Nepal institution, requesting anonymity, claimed that Dr. Chaurasia had worked there only for around six months. They further alleged that the salary figures reflected in the certificate appeared inconsistent with the institution’s pay structure, maintaining that even senior faculty members were not paid salaries of such scale in Indian currency.

The controversy intensified after another set of employment-related documents surfaced during the investigation.

 The records allegedly show that Dr. Chaurasia was associated with a school in Motihari during the same period for which the Nepal-based experience was claimed. 

The overlapping timelines have prompted demands for an official verification of the credentials submitted in the recruitment process.

The latest allegations have also revived discussion over earlier controversies linked to Dr. Chaurasia’s tenure as Guest Faculty at MGCU. 

University sources and former students alleged that complaints regarding her classroom conduct had earlier been submitted before the administration. Audio clips purportedly related to those allegations had circulated locally at the time, though the university did not publicly disclose the outcome of any internal inquiry.

Sources familiar with the matter claimed that more than 40 students had earlier raised concerns regarding her conduct, following which her engagement as Guest Faculty was reportedly discontinued.

Neither Dr. Chaurasia nor university authorities have issued an official response to the allegations so far.
 The controversy is expected to intensify as concerns over transparency and verification in academic appointments continue to attract wider attention.

Speaking to Border News Mirror, Proctor of MGCU Prof. (Dr.) Prashun Datt stated that eligibility calculations in Bihar consider experience from the due date of promotion, not merely the date of formal approval, and confirmed that a formal reply is being prepared.

Sagar Suraj

MOTIHARI : A legal storm has engulfed Mahatma Gandhi Central University (MGCU), Motihari, following a notice challenging the appointment of its Vice-Chancellor, Prof. Sanjay Shrivastva.

A serious legal challenge has emerged, bringing questions of eligibility, statutory compliance, and transparency to the forefront.

 The appointment of Prof. Sanjay Srivastava is under scrutiny following a formal legal notice alleging violation of mandatory norms prescribed under the University Grants Commission (UGC) Regulations, 2018.

The challenge has been initiated by academician Dr. Sandeep Pahal of Meerut through Advocate Alok Anand and has been served upon the UGC and the Ministry of Education. 

At the center of the dispute is Regulation 7.3.0(i) of the UGC Regulations, 2018, which requires a Vice-Chancellor to possess a minimum of ten years’ experience as a Professor in a university, or equivalent experience in a reputed research or academic administrative organization. 

These regulations, framed under Section 26 of the UGC Act, 1956, have statutory force and are binding on all universities across India.

According to the notice, the Ministry’s advertisement dated 21 May 2022 for the MGCU Vice-Chancellor post explicitly adopted these UGC norms. 

However, information obtained under the Right to Information Act from Banaras Hindu University (BHU) indicates that Prof. Srivastava was promoted to the rank of Professor (Stage-5) only on 4 October 2012 after approval by BHU’s Executive Council. 

Based on this date, the petitioner argues that by the June 2022 cut-off, Prof. Srivastava had completed only nine years and eight months of service as a Professor, falling short of the mandatory ten-year requirement.
The notice draws strength from judicial precedents as well .

 In a 2022 ruling, the Supreme Court of India clarified that experience in non-teaching bodies cannot be equated with experience “as Professor” under UGC Regulation 7.3.0.

 Similarly, the Himachal Pradesh High Court in Dr. Dharam Pal Singh v. State of H.P. (2021), relying on Union of India v. M. Bhaskar (1996), held that notional or retrospective promotions cannot be counted for eligibility; only actual service from the date of promotion is valid.

The notice, issued under Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, alleges procedural arbitrariness in the selection process and seeks an immediate review of the appointment.

 It also flags alleged inconsistencies in Prof. Srivastava’s curriculum vitae regarding his Fulbright association with American University, Washington D.C., suggesting possible misrepresentation. He was there as visiting scholar instead of visiting professor, Pahal claimed.

Responding to the allegations, MGCU officials defended the appointment. Speaking to Border News Mirror, Prof. (Dr.) Prashun Datt stated that eligibility calculations in Bihar consider experience from the due date of promotion, not merely the date of formal approval, and confirmed that a formal reply is being prepared.

Meanwhile, sources indicate that no Bihar-specific regulation overrides UGC norms, reinforcing their statutory supremacy. 

If no action is taken within 60 days, the petitioner plans to approach the courts, potentially triggering a precedent-setting ruling on how “experience” under UGC Regulation 7.3.0(i) must be legally computed, notice reads

Previous Next

In a move seen as both disciplinary and strategic, MGCU suspended several students for 14 days following a campus altercation. However, they have still been permitted to take upcoming examinations.

By Sagar Suraj/ BNM

MOTIHARI: Mahatma Gandhi Central University (MGCU) has taken stern disciplinary action against five students from the Departments of English and Management Sciences following a violent altercation that broke out recently on campus.

 The incident has sparked discussions among students about campus safety and inter-departmental rivalry.

University’s Firm Action

According to an official communiqué released by the university on Friday, the disciplinary decision followed a detailed report submitted by the Proctorial Board. The report found the students guilty of serious misconduct, including assault and use of abusive language during the confrontation.

The university, acting under Clause 8 of Ordinance No. 17—which governs student discipline and outlines the duties of the Proctor—finalized the suspension in a meeting held on November 21, 2025.

 Students Suspended for 14 Days

The Chief Proctor’s Office confirmed that the suspension is effective from November 22 to December 4, 2025. During this period, the five suspended students will be barred from entering all university campuses, academic blocks, and administrative buildings.

Those suspended have been identified as Kartik Kumar Mishra, Keshav Kumar Singh, and Pranav Kumar from the Department of English; Kanu Vaibhav, also from the English Department; and Ankit Kumar Mishra from the Department of Management Sciences.

Disruption of Campus Harmony

The Proctorial Board described the incident as a severe breach of university discipline. It stated that such behavior disrupts the academic environment and tarnishes the image of the institution. The Board further noted that the clash reflected “unbecoming conduct” inconsistent with the expectations of MGCU students.

To reinforce accountability, each of the five students has been directed to deposit a fine of Rs. 1,500 at the Office of the Chief Proctor by December 5, 2025. Proof of payment must be submitted immediately after the deposit, failing which the concerned students will not be allowed to appear for upcoming university examinations.

Ban on English Department Events

In an additional measure, the Office of the Chief Proctor has suspended all cultural activities and events organized by the Department of English until further notice. The directive underscores the institution’s zero-tolerance policy towards acts of indiscipline and its intention to preserve a peaceful academic environment.

Administration Reiterates Its Commitment

University authorities reaffirmed their commitment to ensuring a secure and respectful learning environment. A senior administrator stated that MGCU “will continue to take decisive action to maintain campus order and uphold institutional values.

Allegations of Harassment Spark Debate

Meanwhile, some students from the Department of Management Sciences have alleged that the incident stemmed from repeated cases of harassment during visits to the Bankat campus from their current facility at Balua Taal. They claim that female students of the department were teased, triggering tension between student groups. These claims, however, remain unverified by university officials. The university community now awaits further clarification from the administration as inquiries continue into the circumstances leading to the clash.

In a move seen as both disciplinary and strategic, MGCU suspended several students for 14 days following a campus altercation. However, they have still been permitted to take upcoming examinations. Beginning Saturday, students whose syllabi have already been completed were unofficially granted leave to focus on exam preparations, leading to the suspension of regular classes.

Previous Next

Many observers view this measure as the administration’s attempt to restore order and prevent further unrest on campus, balancing the need for discipline with the academic priorities of students in the lead-up to examinations.