In the aftermath of a heated controversy surrounding St. Stephen’s College, where approximately suspension of 100 Students was reported for purportedly failing to attend the morning assembly, and subsequently barred from participating in upcoming examinations, the college principal issued an apology on Tuesday and announced the withdrawal of suspension. This regretful acknowledgement came hours after an uproar ensued over the alleged disciplinary actions taken against the students.
The initial decision to suspend the first-year students and restrict their examination participation had sparked widespread criticism and concern among the college community. In extending the apology, the college principal aimed to address the grievances with withdrawal of suspension and alleviate the apprehensions of the affected students and their parents. The recognition of a “miscommunication” suggests that there may have been a breakdown in conveying accurate information or expectations regarding attendance and disciplinary consequences.
A letter from a college professor to Principal John Varghese on Saturday triggered a controversy surrounding the suspension of 100 Students and debarment of students from upcoming exams. In response, both students and teachers penned a letter to the principal, urging him for withdraw of suspension.
On February 17, an email originating from the principal’s office was dispatched to the concerned students and parents. The email stated, “This is to bring to your kind notice that there was a prior request for you to meet with the Principal regarding low attendance in the morning assembly. Unfortunately, we noted that you were unable to report to the Principal’s office as requested. Regrettably, due to non-compliance with this request, I inform you that students will not be permitted to sit for the upcoming exams as a consequence of the suspension of 100 Students.”
Varghese took the initiative on Tuesday night to send out another email to the parents and pupils. He began by acknowledging a previous email sent from his office on Saturday, February 17, which he considered a miscommunication due to incorrect wording. He apologised and noted that, according to standard procedure when his office speaks on his behalf, he had not been copied on the email. To try and make things right, he explained the circumstances in this follow-up email.
Varghese proceeded to shed light on the unique practices and traditions of St. Stephen’s College, emphasising that every institution has its distinctive features. He specifically addressed the morning assembly, emphasising that it is an old tradition of the college. Importantly, he clarified that despite the inclusion of small portions from various religious and philosophical texts, the assembly is not to be construed as a religious event.
Drawing on the testimony of former students, he stressed that the morning assembly is, in fact, not a religious exercise. Instead, it’s a chance for junior college students to interact with morally upright people and seasoned people who can impart their expertise and wisdom.
In the light of the misworded email that was sent from my office, without my clearance, please now note that there will be no suspension with regard to attendance for the morning assembly. Parents are important stakeholders in the broad-based, wholesome education that the college provides, and it is in this spirit that parents were addressed in the incorrectly worded email, with inadvertent and serious errors… My apologies for that,
Principal, St. Stephen’s College
The official notice by the college can be accessed here: Stephen’s College Notice
Throughout the day, a first-year BA student who wished to be anonymous told The Indian Express that they had been told there would be repercussions if they didn’t show up for the morning assembly. However, the student emphasised that there was no explicit mention of the suspension of 100 Students or debarment from exams in the communicated repercussions. The understanding was that the college administration could exercise its discretion in withholding scholarships or campus accommodation, but the severity of being debarred from exams was unforeseen.
Expressing concern, another first-year student pointed out the practical challenges faced by many peers who hail from different states. Due to the geographical distance, parents were unable to travel to Delhi promptly. This student tried to schedule a meeting after getting an email from the principal’s office but was not given the chance.
A common assertion among students was that the punitive measures of suspension of 100 Students and exam debarment were selectively applied, targeting those who had not attended a single morning assembly in January. The student body is now questioning and concerned about the fairness and openness of the college administration’s disciplinary measures.
The chairman of the Economics department, Professor Sanjeev Grewal, voiced his surprise at the suspension of 100 Students from the institution along with threats of expulsion from future tests in an open letter intended to serve as a pre-clarification. Grewal contends that expulsion from an exam should only occur for certain reasons specified in the policies and procedures of the university. He contended that such harsh penalties shouldn’t be necessary for a morning assembly attendance deficit.
Grewal further underlined the students’ fundamental freedom not to engage in any religious activity while attending accredited schools or while getting government funding without their free will. He emphasised the student’s ability to revoke consent at any time, particularly if doing so conflicts with their religious convictions or, if they are a juvenile, their parent(s)’ wishes.
Grewal concluded by asserting that compelling students to listen to religious scriptures and enforcing prayers, potentially conflicting with their religious convictions, is not only illegal but also unethical and runs counter to the liberal ethos of higher learning institutions.
