JEE scores are basis of discrimination in IITs: APPSC rejects IIT Bombay's report on student death

NEW DELHI: The Ambedkar Periyar Phule Study Circle (APPSC) rejected the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Bombay’s internal committee report that said there is no proof of caste-discrimination in Darshan Solanki’s death. The student circle has been voicing support for the chemical engineering student after he allegedly died by suicide from Februray 12.

During a protest gathering demanding justice for Darshan Solanki on March 4, father of Aniket Ambhore an IIT-B student, who died by suicide a few years ago, asked not to trust the committee and that it will blame the student’s weakness for the unfortunate incident.

Also Read: IIT Bombay Student Suicide: Darshan Solanki Report

The APPSC renamed the IIT Bombay’s report as “Signed confession of Institutional murder of Darshan Solanki by the committee”.

“The nonchalance with which the committee has substituted Darshan’s name with “DS” speaks volumes of shallow, superficial and flippant attitude in which they have prepared a hasty report.”

The students also called it amateur work as the committee linked the academic performance of Darshan to his Joint Entrance Examination (JEE) scores. “Is the committee not aware that JEE scores form the basis for discrimination in IITs where the practice of asking rank is used to single out, humiliate, guilt the marginalised students into thinking that they are not deserving and competent?”

Also Read: IIT Bombay Student Death: 'No specific evidence of direct caste-based discrimination

It further pointed out how the report is contradictory in critical places and termed it as an attempt to hide the caste-discrimination prevailing on campus. It listed out seven reasons why it rejected the “contradictory” report.

The report disregarded Darshan’s sister's statement on discrimination citing that she cannot recall “specific instances”. It also does not mention the methodology used to analyse the testimonies. The report does not have a external expert or have a scope of dissenting judgement.

The student circle said “it is common knowledge that the support system exist for namesake on this campus and that the SC, ST cell do not have legitimized mandate yet”.