The Delhi High Court has directed a committee at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) in the national Capital to conclude its probe into the allegations of plagiarism by a Ph.D. Scholar against two of its professors, and submit a report to it.
Justice Sanjeev Narula, while dealing with the scholar’s plea against the termination of his registration from the institute on account of unsatisfactory performance in two consecutive semesters, said that the facts of the case are “quite unsettling” and also sought the report of the Student Grievance Redressal Committee in the matter and deferred passing any interim directions at this stage.
The petitioner alleged that his co-guide used two of his research proposals for obtaining a Lok Sabha-sponsored fellowship worth `10.80 lakh for herself.
He said that the name of the chairperson of the Student Research Committee, who was his research supervisor, was mentioned as the “Co-Principal Investigator” on research proposals for the fellowship.
The petitioner claimed that after he confronted them about the issue of plagiarism, they adopted an adversarial attitude towards him which led him to make complaints to the Student Grievance Redressal Committee, Institute Level Plagiarism Committee and the Department of Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances.
The counsel for IIT Delhi agreed that the issue of plagiarism is very serious and the petitioner’s allegation is viewed with seriousness by the institute and informed that the Institute Level Plagiarism Committee would consider the complaint of the petitioner.
“In light of the foregoing development, interim directions are deferred till the next date of hearing. In the meantime, the Institute Level Plagiarism Committee is directed to conclude the investigation and submit the report to the Court.
Further, the report prepared by the Student Grievance Redressal Committee is also to be submitted with the Court before the next date of hearing, with a copy to the Petitioner,” said the court in its order passed earlier this month.
The court also issued notice on the petition and granted time to the institute to file its response.
