DUTA PRESS RELEASE: 8 OCTOBER 2014

University silent on DU VC’s Plagiarism; DUTA demands Thorough Probe

The DUTA has written to the MHRD seeking an enquiry into a pending case of plagiarism in regard to the Vice-Chancellor, Prof. Dinesh Singh. The matter had been included in the White Paper submitted by the DUTA earlier. Meanwhile, the MHRD has constituted a committee to enquire into allegations of plagiarism in regard to some professors in Delhi University. The DUTA has therefore demanded that the case against Prof. Dinesh Singh be included in the terms of reference of this committee. The DUTA has further demanded that Prof. Dinesh Singh be removed from office pending the probe since as Vice-Chancellor he would be able to intimidate witnesses and tamper with evidence. (Letter with all annexures)

The case of Prof. Dinesh Singh’s suspected attempt to pass off five publications authored by someone else as his own was reported in the Times of India in December 2012. The University had defended the VC by claiming that his researcher profile on ResearcherID, a website maintained by Thomson Reuters, had been hacked and that a complaint had been lodged with the Delhi Police. However, its replies to RTI queries following the incident reveal glaring inconsistencies in the University’s claims.

While the researcher profile was created from Prof. Dinesh Singh’s official email id, the University claimed that it was a “fake” one. It claimed further that it had taken up the matter with Thomson Reuters and received a response from them. However, in a reply to an RTI it admitted that it had not received any communication from Thomson Reuter on the issue. In the same reply, the University added a note by an Assistant Registrar putting the onus on Thomson Reuters for the creation of the so-called “fake” profile, without substantiating this with any documentary evidence. Since then, the University has offered no proof that would help rule out the VC’s hand in the foul play.

Moreover , the University has remained suspiciously silent on the details about the police complaint it had claimed to have lodged. It has not provided any copy of this complaint in response to the RTI.

It may be noted that the services of a DU teacher found guilty on the same charge had been terminated in the past. Such a case acquires far greater seriousness when the Vice-Chancellor, the person holding the highest office in the University, is involved.    

---