Connect with Us
Moneylife - Facebook Moneylife - Twitter Moneylife - Linkedin Moneylife - Youtube Moneylife Rss feed

Moneylife » Life » Right to Information » Irregularities in IIT JEE: Will the new HRD minister offer justice to this tenacious whistleblower?

Irregularities in IIT JEE: Will the new HRD minister offer justice to this tenacious whistleblower?

Vinita Deshmukh | 01/11/2012 02:13 PM | 

Rajeev Kumar, professor of IIT Kharagpur, is consistently using RTI to expose irregularities in the IIT joint entrance examination and has triumphed by making the entrance test transparent this year but he has been suspended since 2011. Last week the HRD ministry had directed IIT Kharagpur to act on his indefinite suspension. An overview of his amazing battle through RTI

What happens if you doggedly try to cleanse up a corrupt system? You would be suspended from work if you happen to be professor Rajeev Kumar, a computer science engineering professor at IIT Kharagpur, even though the Supreme Court has hailed him as  “one of the many unsung heroes who helped in improving the system.”

On 22nd October, the human resources development (HRD) ministry in a letter, had ordered the Director of IIT Kharagpur for ‘urgent’ revocation of suspension and appointment of an independent commissioner for departmental enquiry regarding professor Rajeev Kumar’s indefinite suspension since March 2011. This comes as a sequel to several reminders made by the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) to the IIT management to “examine the issue.” The CVC then on 25 September 2012 brought this indefinite delay to the notice of the HRD ministry which then issued a letter to the Director, IIT Kharagpur last week. To date, Kumar is debarred from teaching and research work and entering his departmental office complex and laboratories.

Ever since his son missed admission to IIT in 2006 by just three marks, he has been pursuing the flawed marking and student selection process of the Joint Entrance Examination (JEE) common to all IITs by filing a string of RTI (Right to Information) applications. RTI documents showed that 994 top scorers of JEE 2006, the year in which his son too appeared for the entrance examination, failed to make it to the IITs whereas lower scoring candidates were given admissions. According to Kumar, “this was due to faulty calculation of cut-off marks”. So he decided to go about correcting the flawed system to bring in transparency to this prestigious entrance test so that brilliant students are not denied entry into the esteemed IITs. His suspicion about the transparency of the candidate selection system grew when RTI replies revealed that the optical response sheets of 2006 (answer sheets in layman’s language) were ‘shredded’ (destroyed) despite the rule being that they should be preserved for one year. Also, the management of the IIT changed its version thrice in the CIC hearing and court regarding the formula it adopted for calculating cut-off percentage.

What provoked this IIT professor to use RTI so rigorously? In September 2006, Kumar read in the newspapers that the CIC ordered the UPSC (Union Public Service Commission) to reveal its admission and selection procedure and so was inspired to pursue the same for IITs.

Thanks to Kumar’s sustained efforts at the expense of being “threatened, harassed and victimised by the Director, deans and the registrar of IIT Kharagpur since he is filing RTI applications and exposing certain wrong-doings (as recorded in a CIC order)”, for the first time the IIT JEE entrance test of April 2012 displayed transparency. The students were provided carbon copies of their answer sheets; the model answers have been put up on the IIT website to facilitate students to cross check their answers and thereby marks and; the cut-off percentage was announced prior to the examination instead of after evaluation of the answer sheets. This was a sequel to a Supreme Court judgment which directed the IITs to upgrade the selection process and make the system more transparent.

Between September 2006 and January 2012, Rajeev Kumar has filed over 50 RTI applications for information on various facets of IIT JEE entrance examination and other alleged mal-administration in IIT Kharagpur, even as he was fighting a legal battle in the high court and Supreme Court. He has also filed 39 second appeals/complaints to the Central Information Commission between May 2007 and April 2012.

Prof Kumar has been ironically suspended by the management of IIT Kharagpur in May 2011 for “damaging the reputation of the institute” because he made allegations on procedures adopted for IIT JEE entrance examination, exposed copying in these examinations and highlighted irregularities in purchase of laptops. The management of IIT Kharagpur in turn has alleged his involvement in corruption in purchase of laptops. As per rules, it is mandatory to form a committee to review his suspension as he comes under the Central Civil Service Rules of 1965. IIT Kharagpur, though stated that it has its own set of statutory rules for suspension cases, has issued him a letter saying that his suspension would continue till further orders. The HRD ministry in its letter has scuttled that argument.

Kumar filed his first RTI application in September 2006 seeking information on the cut-off marks for each subject (Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics) and marks scored by the top 2,000 students who had got through to IITs. IIT-JEE tests examine the analytical abilities of a student in Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics. The students get a call for ‘counselling’ if they clear the pre-determined cut-off marks set for each subject as well as score the required aggregate marks.

After the PIO failed to reply, Kumar filed a first appeal but that too was ignored. He then filed a second appeal to the CIC. Kumar also simultaneously filed another RTI application asking for the procedure followed to determine the cut-off marks, the question paper with model answers and names of all the people associated with the examination procedure of 2006.  The PIO of IIT stated in an evasive reply that there was “no set procedure to determine cut-off marks” and also refused to reveal the question paper. Then he filed a third application in January 2007 on the number of students who got marks above the cut-off marks and had got selected.

In April 2007, the CIC ordered the IIT Kharagpur to provide him the required information on all the three RTI applications he had filed. The information finally provided to him but did not explain how they reached that cut-off. IIT gave yet another explanation of the cut-off system in September 2007 and then submitted a third explanation to Kolkata High Court in August 2009. This proved there was no proper system.

In fact, for years, says Kumar, the selection of candidates was a very complex procedure and it was never made public. There was utmost secrecy in the marking procedure. As per rules, each year, one of the IITs is in charge of conducting the examination.

After Kumar was provided the list of all candidates who had cleared the examination of 2006, he analysed the marks of 32,000 candidates and was shocked to find that there was discrepancy in the cut-off marks. It showed that his son Sanchit and 993 others were wrongly excluded from being called for the next round which is called ’counselling’. The information also revealed that sons and daughters of IIT professors are almost always selected. Armed with this information he approached the Kolkata High Court but the judge did not allow the petition. The Supreme Court too dismissed his appeal regarding his son’s case. It however stated in its recent judgment that: Excerpts from Supreme Court Judgment [(2012) 1 SCC 157] “... the action taken by the appellants in challenging the procedure for JEE 2006, their attempts to bring in transparency in the procedure by various RTI applications, and the debate generated by the several views of experts during the course of the writ proceedings, have helped in making the merit ranking process more transparent and accurate... IITs and the candidates who now participate in the examinations must, to a certain extent, thank appellants for their effort in bringing such transparency and accuracy in the ranking procedure. ...have to be satisfied in being one of the many unsung heroes who helped in improving the system.”

For Prof Rajeev Kumar, the story is far from over. More than 20 appeals/complaints are pending with the CIC against deemed refusal of information and submitting false/irrelevant/misleading information. His aim is complete cleansing of the irregularities and corruption in IITs. Too Utopian?

(Vinita Deshmukh is the consulting editor of Moneylife, an RTI activist and convener of the Pune Metro Jagruti Abhiyaan. She is the recipient of prestigious awards like the Statesman Award for Rural Reporting which she won twice in 1998 and 2005 and the Chameli Devi Jain award for outstanding media person for her investigation series on Dow Chemicals. She co-authored the book “To The Last Bullet - The Inspiring Story of A Braveheart - Ashok Kamte” with Vinita Kamte and is the author of “The Mighty Fall”. She can be reached at

Post Comment


Samantha Roy

Samantha Roy 3 years ago

IIT Kharagpur – Officiating Registrar Mr. T K Ghosal who appeared for interview on Dec 05. 2012 for the Post of Registrar in IIT Kharagpur does not fulfil the minimum qualification prescribed for recruitment as per UGC / MHRD / Judgement of Supreme Court of India, i.e., 10+2+3+2 / 11 + 1 + 3 + 2 pattern, and has secured less than 50% marks in Master’s Degree received by Distance Education.

As per MHRD / UGC norm, the educational qualification for the post of Registrar must be as Under:

“A Master’s Degree with at least 55% of Marks or its equivalent grade of ‘B’ in the UGC Scale 7 point scale.”

Members of Screening Committee have shortlisted the name of Dr. T K Ghosal without following the above criteria and T K Ghosal’s allegations.

Prof B K Mathur who is one of member in the screening committee for shorlisting the candidates for the post of Registrar in IIT Kharagpur is under CBI scanner because of his involvement in fake institute scam in IIT-Kharagpur. B K Mathur, current chief vigilance officer, was a member of the board of governors of IEE (I) in 2001.

Reply »Link » Report abuse

vns 3 years ago in reply to Samantha Roy

Sankar Kumar Som
Director(officiating), Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur

Dear Director,

I understand that IIT Kharagpur is looking for a Registrar and out of the applicants the Officiating Registrar Mr. T K Ghosal who does not meet the qualification requirements as per MHRD/ UGC Norm/ Judgement of Supreme Court of India, i.e., 10+2+3+2 / 11 + 1 + 3 + 2 pattern, and has secured less than 50% marks in Master’s Degree received by Distance Education, appeared for interview on Dec 05. 2012 for the Post of Registrar in IIT Kharagpur
As per MHRD / UGC norm, the educational qualification for the post of Registrar must be as Under: “A Master’s Degree with at least 55% of Marks or its equivalent grade of ‘B’ in the UGC Scale 7 point scale.”

Unless there is something else to show, which I am sure you do not have, it will be wrong to appont a person who does not meet the minimum requirements for the post. It is a legal question but there are other related questions? Do we not have better people available out of 120 crores Indians for the post? Have the IITs gone so low as to appoint a disqualified person for the post. What efficiency and work culture will develop at IITKgp with such a person holding a key post.

I request you to please clarify/ justify what is the interest or reason for giving consideration to Sri T.K. Ghoshal, a non-qualified person for the post when he is not fit to be officiating Registrar either.

Reply» Link » Report abuse
Madhur Kotharay

Madhur Kotharay 3 years ago

I don't understand what we are arguing about. Ashok Das and Nikunj don't agree with the article and have voiced their opinions why they don't.

What is the need to start accusing them of yellow journalism in the name of IIT KGP?

I don't know who is right: Prof RK or IIT, KGP. So I have no sides to take but I believe that we should let people disagree as long as they are not offensive. I did not find anything objectionable in Ashok Das' writeups; in fact, he has been polite all through. Whether he is truthful is not a call I can make but so be it.

I am not a lawyer interested in dissecting the case. I am a graduate of IIT Bombay (I entered IIT in 1983, not 2006 :-)) and am fairly active with IIT Bombay Alumni Association. So, yes, IITJEE's reputation concerns me more than most of you.

Having dealt with thousands of IITians and hundreds of IIT professors over the last 29 years, I can guarantee you that there are professors who could stoop as low as accused in this case, and then there are professors who are paragons of virtue.

So I would be happy if both sides of the story are presented.

Reply »Link » Report abuse
P M Ravindran

P M Ravindran 3 years ago

I am glad that Prof Rajeev Kumar has succeeded in bringing transparency to the selection process through IIT JEE. I wish God speed for his reinstatement and punishment for the guilty.

Reply »Link » Report abuse

vns 3 years ago

While going through the acrimonious debate, more than the Article itself, I found the discussion, as not very useful, which is leading to the loss of direction in dealing with the major issue. In fact, the issue before us is whether the admission to IITs through JEE is sacrosanct or there is a play and chances of making the merit list upside down and deny the meritorious ones admission into IITs. Can we remain on this, though Prof RK's issue as Whistleblower is extremely important, rather than trying exclusively to solve Prof RK's problem
My own feeling is that buying items of personal/ domestic uses from Project money is very common in every IIT, in every University etc. There can be a study on this with interesting output. And IIT Kgp used this lever to pull RK down leaving others untouched.
Prof RK got interested in RTI because his son could not get admission in IITs has nothing wrong in it. All of us get to know of the issues only when it hurts us directly.

Reply »Link » Report abuse
Rajesh Kothari

Rajesh Kothari 3 years ago

It is bit surprising that no one laments the fact that 993 students were denied admission to IIT in 2006 because of fault of admission process.

I remember, my son had appeared in 2006 JEE and lost chance to get in because he got less marks in Maths. That year, Maths paper was very tough. He had got good marks in other two subjects. Just because he had 15 marks (I hope it is correct) in Maths he could not get in. May be he was one of the unlucky 993 mentioned in the article.

He tried once again in 2007 and got admission at IIT Bombay. But he lost one year.

Can any one compensate him in any way for loss of 1 year of his student life?

I appreciate efforts put in by Prof to bring transparency in the IIT JEE entrance system.

Reply »Link » Report abuse
Daily Newsletter

1,00,000 Readers

Follow Moneylife
DNL facebook icon DNL linked in icon DNL twitter icon DNL youtube icon DNL rss icon
Moneylife Magazine

What's your say?

Will the Panama papers leak help India recover illegal money?
Can't Say
Enter Code : secure code
    change code

What you said

Can Indian banks recover all dues from Vijay Mallya?

Thanks for casting your votes! View Previous Polls

Join Over 100,000 Awesome Readers

  1. News that Mainstream media does not always cover
  2. Views that are bold and unbiased
  3. Reports that focus on your interests as consumer, investor & citizen