Co-founder and trustee of Ashoka University Sanjeev Bikhchandani has openly voiced his increasing dissatisfaction with continuing with the university, calling it “too much of a headache” and admitted that he has thought about leaving. The development transpired after criticism from an alumnus about how the institution handled the controversy surrounding Professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad, a Samajwadi Party leader.

He is a professor and the director of the political science department at Ashoka University in Sonipat of Haryan. His social media post on the press briefing on “Operation Sindoor” by Wing Command Vyomika Singh and Colonel Sofiya Qureshi led to his arrest last month. The institution came under fire from liberals for failing to take a stance for him.

Bikhchandani, in an internal email that has now been revealed, expressed that he and his fellow trustee, Pramath Raj Sinha and founding chairperson Ashish Dhawan, have earnestly contemplated stepping down from their positions. The concerns of the alumnus regarding the university’s lack of support for Mahmudabad were addressed by him.

He asked, “Why don’t you and other alumni offer to step in and take over? Pramath, Ashish, and I have seriously discussed the option of walking away. Ashoka is too much of a headache. Is it worth the effort,” in his email. “Teaching a course at Ashoka is academic scholarship. Research published in a peer-reviewed academic journal is academic scholarship. An oped published by an academic in a mainstream newspaper is journalism and not academic scholarship,” he underlined.

“A political opinion expressed on Facebook or Twitter (X) or Instagram is not academic scholarship. Consequently, any public outcry about a political opinion an academic may express on social media is not an attack on academic freedom, even if the person expressing that opinion has a day job as an academic,” he emphasised.

Bikhchandani added, “If a regulator or the government or law enforcement goes after you for a social media post, it is not an infringement of academic freedom. It might be an infringement of freedom of speech, however, there are provisions within the Constitution and the law where you can find protection.” 

He also lashed out at Mahmudabad and remarked, “You are a grown-up adult. You are responsible for your actions and any consequences thereof. Ashoka is not obliged to support you for political opinions you express in your personal capacity. You did not seek Ashoka’s consent before posting on social media, you cannot now present Ashoka with a fait accompli and expect support. Cruel as it may sound, you make your choices and you live with the outcome.”

Activism not embedded to a liberal arts university

“Activism and a Liberal Arts University are not joined at the hip. Ashoka is a Liberal Arts and Sciences University. Whether to be activists or not is a conscious choice people make,” Bikhchandani added. He highlighted that previously he has raised concerns regarding the activism at Ashoka and on each occasion, he has faced backlash from the activists and their supporters, both from within and outside Ashoka including students, faculty and activists, among others.

He stated that they claimed, “If you are running a liberal arts university, then activism goes with the territory,” “I am an arrogant owner,” “dirty filthy capitalists don’t understand how a university runs (they somehow forget that the same capitalists are paying their salaries).” He dismissed these claims, arguing that the stance was “spurious” and at odds with his own educational background. “I went to a liberal arts and sciences college and there was little or no activism and we got along just fine. In fact, some of us excelled,” he contended.

The trustee outlined, “You can be a great liberal arts university and not be activist. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a liar. As an institution, Ashoka cannot take an activist position. It is governed by the law of the land. It is answerable to regulators and to government authorities. It is not a political party or movement. It is an educational institution.”

“Ashoka is a university under the Haryana Private Universities Act. It is not a political party or movement, it is an educational institution. It cannot take an activist position, and if any of its office-bearers wish to take an activist position personally, they may resign their offices before doing so,” he declared.

He further asserted, “Appropriate timing of what to say, where, when and to whom and how is a sign of intelligence (beyond academic scholarship). If you end up offending a whole bunch of people, even though you were not technically incorrect in what you said, then an expression of regret and an apology is a sign of good grace and decency. Hijacking an institutional platform to make it subordinate to your political agenda is an act of institutional capture and selfishness. Expecting the institution to then support you is an act of entitlement and arrogance.”

Bikhchandani even pointed out a “policy issue” that Ashoka’s ruling council needed to consider and asked, “Can a full-time academic also pursue a political career? In the private sector, we generally stay away from what are termed as ‘politically exposed persons.’ Should Ashoka have such a policy?”

Although the Supreme Court granted interim bail to Mahmudabad, it condemned his comments as “dog-whistling” and devoid of “neutral and respectful” language. The court stressed that while free expression is guaranteed, these kinds of situations call for accountability rather than popularity.

He accused that Wing Command Vyomika Singh and Colonel Sofiya Qureshi’s representation of the armed forces as “optics and hypocrisy” unless it was demonstrated through what he termed real justice for “marginalised” individuals, specifically highlighting Muslims residing in India. He further justified his comments, asserting that his statement had been misconstrued and was not intended to be misogynistic. He expressed his support for the inclusion of women officers and urged right-wing advocates to show equal concern for ordinary Indian Muslims.

Ashoka University: Liberal activism and woke ideology

The arrest of Mahmudaba, along with the remarks from the apex court and now Bikhchandani’s letter has brought the leftist activism at the university into the spotlight, however, it has long been a hub for the woke epidemic and leftist politics. From anti-Israel activism, Brahmin animosity to false claims of election manipulation, the institution’s students and faculty have left no stone unturned to promote their deceptive narrative.

In May 2024, Ashoka University students showcased pro-Palestine placards at their convocation ceremony. A video capturing the event gained significant traction on social media, featuring students attired for their degree conferral, holding signs that proclaimed “Free Palestine” and “Stop Genocide” above their heads. Importantly, the Ashoka University Student Government (AUSG) was advocating for the severance of ties with Tel Aviv University in Israel.

In March 2024, Ashoka University students were reported to have raised Hinduphobic slogans, notably “Brahmin-Baniyawaad Murdabad,” within the university’s premises. Videos of these students gained significant traction on social media. In addition to disparaging the Brahmin and Baniya communities, they also shouted slogans including “Jai Bheem-Jai Meem” and “Jai Savitri-Jai Fatima”. Furthermore, they called for a caste census and reservation at Ashoka.

In February 2024, the AUSG released a statement denouncing Israel’s military actions in Gaza and insisted that the “genocide” occurring in Gaza must cease. The social media post characterized the horrific terror attack on 7th October by Hamas terrorists within the Jewish state as the “events taking place on 7th of October 2023.” Predictably, there was no reference to the murder of 1,300 Israeli and foreign nationals, the rapes of women, or the taking of hostages to Gaza. All atrocities of Hamas were conveniently overlooked.

Even the faculty members of the University have encountered criticism due to their negligent research practices and conduct. In August 2023, a research paper alleging that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) engaged in election manipulation gained widespread attention on social media after being promoted by Congress leader Shashi Tharoor. It was published by Professor Sabyasachi Das. The study was riddled with errors and in light of the scrutiny directed at the paper, he chose to resign from his position. Notably, AUSG expressed its support and alleged that the research conducted by the professors is “cutting-edge.”

In November 2021, Professor Neelanjan Ircar made inaccurate assertions that the portrait of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose located at Rashtrapati Bhavan depicted Bengali actor Prosenjit Chatterjee. He employed this narrative to ridicule Lord Ram in the name of criticizing the BJP. Sircar, who serves as an Assistant Professor of Political Science at the university, stated in a now-deleted tweet, “Totally amazing! This isn’t Netaji Subash Chandra Bose. It’s a picture of the renowned Bengali actor Prosenjit Chatterjee portraying Netaji in a film.”

His tweet was already saturated with falsehood when he decided to mock Hindu beliefs and claimed, “And this after yelling ‘Jai Shri Ram’ at a Netaji event. The bankruptcy of political appropriation of independence-era leaders.”

Considering the university’s woke-infested track record, Mahmudabad’s recent actions and the criticism aimed at Bikhchandani are not unexpected.