DU History Students Protest Course Cuts

GG News Bureau
New Delhi, 9th Oct: Hundreds of students from the History Department of Delhi University staged a protest on Friday against the alleged reduction of courses, demanding that the university restore all 43 papers proposed by the faculty.

The students alleged that although 43 papers had been proposed for teaching, the university administration had permitted only 23. They said the reduction had limited academic choices, particularly in subjects covering caste, gender, tribal histories, labour and medieval Indian history.

The protesters also questioned the decision-making process, alleging that it lacked transparency and did not adequately involve members of the History Department faculty.

Teachers Question Curriculum Decisions
Addressing the gathering, former Head of the History Department Prabhu Mohapatra said teachers were being prevented from teaching subjects in which they had specialised research expertise.

History professor and Academic Council member Maya John alleged that even the Head of the Department was not permitted to speak during Academic Council meetings. She further claimed that the expert committee examining the courses did not include history professors.

Another professor and Academic Council member, Jitendra Meena, alleged that the developments reflected a wider pattern of ideological intervention in higher education.

Meena referred to a recent Prime Minister’s Office notification listing certain books, including B. R. Ambedkar’s Annihilation of Caste and works by Sharmila Rege, as not to be taught in universities. His remarks linked the dispute over the History Department’s curriculum to broader concerns about academic freedom and the selection of teaching materials.

Students Demand Academic Autonomy
The protesting students called for the restoration of all 43 proposed papers and an end to what they described as arbitrary course deletions. They also demanded protection for the department’s academic autonomy and a transparent process that respects teachers’ expertise.

The students raised concerns about infrastructure, calling for adequate classrooms, academic resources and other facilities to meet the needs of rising enrolment under the four-year undergraduate programme.

In their statement, they argued that the reduction was not simply a matter of curriculum design but had wider implications for the quality of education, intellectual freedom and the future of historical scholarship.

The university administration’s response to the allegations was not included in the information available for this report.