PU proposal to relax 2-year unfair means ban stuck amid procedural hurdles

Akashdeep.Virk@timesofindia.com

Chandigarh: Nearly two years after Panjab University (PU) announced plans to revisit its regulations governing unfair means cases (UMC), the proposal to relax the existing provision debarring students from examinations for two years has failed to move forward, allegedly due to procedural and departmental hurdles.

The proposal, first publicly discussed in Aug 2024, was aimed at easing certain provisions of the university’s disciplinary framework in unfair means cases, particularly the punishment imposed on students found in possession of cheating material during examinations.

However, despite discussions at the university level and initial indications that amendments would be brought in, no changes have been implemented so far.

A senior university official privy to the development said the proposal had run into delays at multiple administrative stages.

“The matter has not been shelved, but the file has faced issues at some stages. There were departmental observations and procedural concerns that slowed its movement. It is still under consideration,” the official said on condition of anonymity.

In Aug 2024, PU had announced that its regulation committee was examining the rules governing unfair means cases, especially the provision under which a student found carrying cheating material can be barred from appearing in university examinations for two years.

At the time, university authorities had maintained that the regulation had been framed when PU followed an annual examination system and that some provisions were no longer entirely in sync with the present semester-based academic structure.

Then vice-chancellor Renu Vig had stated that the university was looking at easing certain rules in the interest of students, particularly because a two-year debarment in a semester system could significantly disrupt a student’s academic progression.

Apart from the punishment clause, the university had also proposed changes to the review mechanism in UMC cases. Under the existing framework, two separate committees comprising three members each examine such matters. Sources said changes were proposed in the manner review petitions would be assessed, including discussions on a wider review panel in cases requiring reconsideration.

Another university official said examination-related amendments require approvals at several levels before implementation.

“Since it concerns university regulations, observations from different departments and statutory requirements have to be addressed. That process has taken time,” the official said.

The delay means the existing UMC rules, including the two-year examination ban in applicable cases, continue to remain in force. University authorities are yet to indicate any timeline for finalising the proposed amendments.