Student Grievance Redressal Committee: A new way to get your grievances resolved?

Introduction to the Student Grievance Redressal Committees (SGRC)

The Student Grievance Redressal Committees (SGRC) are dedicated bodies that are supposed to be formed to address and resolve various grievances faced by students during their academic and campus life. This mechanism aims to ensure that students’ issues are heard and resolved efficiently and sensitively. It is being established due to the observation that many grievances remain unresolved within the current system, and students should have the option to approach an unbiased higher authority in such cases. The committee has not been appointed yet to the best of our knowledge, although an email was sent on student notices by the Dean of Student Affairs on January 29, 2024 with a copy of the report about the formation and responsibilities of the committee which can be found here.

Insight interviewed ex-ISAA (2021-22) Divyashree Tambade, Prof. Prita Pant (Head of the Policy Making Committee), Prof. Avinash Mahajan (the ex-Dean AP), and Prof. S Doola (current Dean SA) for this article, some of whom were responsible for drafting of the report. This article aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of its structure and functioning, as we present some opinions and suggestions from our end for potential improvements.

Origin and Inspiration

The inception of the SGRC was inspired by the Institute Strategic Plan 2017-22, which emphasized enhancing the student experience as a critical objective. Inspired by the ombuds system present in other universities like IIT Kanpur, the establishment of these committees was also a part of the manifesto of Hrishikesh Baviskar (GSAA-UG 2022-23) and the implementation started during his tenure. The establishment of these committees will be a step towards improving the existing system by providing a clear, streamlined process for addressing student issues. Once established, these are supposed to come into play when there is a lack of clarity regarding whom to approach while seeking a solution for an issue, or when all other options have been exhausted and no satisfactory solution has been reached.

Drafting of the Report

A designated committee called the Student Grievances Redressal Policy Committee (SGRPC) was set up to draft the policy of establishing a grievance redressal mechanism in the institute. This committee reviewed grievance redressal systems in place at other IITs and international universities (for example, Harvard, Stanford, Cornell etc) as a benchmark for the report. Additionally, a survey was conducted during Madhav Gupta’s (GSAA-UG 2021-22) tenure to evaluate the adequacy of the existing conflict/issue-addressing systems in the institute. The results of this survey were also considered in the making of the report. Following discussions with stakeholders, a draft was created and refined through several iterations. The final report, outlining the function of the SGRC, was released in January 2024, though the exact implementation start date was not specified.

Classification of Grievances

Grievances are categorised by SGRPC into several types:

• Academic Grievances: Issues related to course conduct, examinations, grading, and academic interactions.
• Administrative Grievances: Problems involving course registration, fees, and administrative processes.
• PhD Student Grievances: Issues between PhD students and their guides or departmental administration.
• Social Life-Based Grievances: Issues such as ragging, harassment, and discrimination.
• Non-Academic Grievances: Concerns related to extracurricular activities.
• Hostel-Related Grievances: Problems concerning hostel conditions, staff, and management.

Committees Involved

The student grievance redressal mechanism is composed of 3 committees: the existing respective Department Undergraduate/Postgraduate Committees, and two new committees, namely the – the Student Grievance Consultative Committee (SGCC) and the Institute Student Grievance Redressal Committee (ISGRC), each set to be established with a specific role:

1. Student Grievance Consultative Committee (SGCC):
   • Role: Acts as the first point of contact for students, guiding them to the appropriate redressal mechanisms (for instance, redirecting them to the gender cell in case of gender-based issues).
   • Functionaries: Includes 3 student representatives – the General Secretary Academic Affairs (UG and PG), and the General Secretary Hostel Affairs.
2. Department Undergraduate Committee (DUGC) / Department Postgraduate Committee (DPGC):
   • Role: Addresses academic grievances specific to a department.
   • Functionaries: Includes faculty advisors and student representatives from the respective departments.
3. Institute Student Grievance Redressal Committee (ISGRC):

• Role: Addresses grievances that do not fall under the purview of existing committees in the institute. Also, addresses grievances escalated to it from or other bodies like departmental committees, Gender Cell/ SC/ST cell, etc. 
• Functionaries: Constituted by the Senate Chairperson and includes faculty and student representatives. The convener and co-convener are supposed to be appointed for a three-year tenure.

Grievances Under the Purview of ISGRC 

The ISGRC can act as a neutral body for issues that have been escalated, to ensure a fair and unbiased resolution process. Additionally, the committee can function as a centralized body to address grievances that do not necessarily fall under the purview of existing institute committees. Here are some situations where ISGRC will be best suited to address student grievances:

1. PhD Student-Supervisor Conflicts: One prevalent issue at the PhD level is the conflict between students and their supervisors. These conflicts can arise due to personality clashes or other disagreements. Typically, the Departmental Postgraduate Committee (DPGC) addresses such issues. However, if the DPGC is unable to resolve the matter, the ISGRC can intervene. For instance, if a PhD student wishes to change supervisors midway through their program, the ISGRC can facilitate the reallocation of a new supervisor and address the complexities of sharing intellectual property.

2.     Sudden Changes in Grading Policies or other academic grievances: The ISGRC is supposed to address issues arising from sudden changes made by professors to the grading policy of a course midway, classroom conduct, other issues related to examinations, etc. This ensures a fair decision-making process and upholds academic integrity.

3.     Unresponsive Hostel Hall Managers: Grievances regarding unresponsive communications between hostel hall managers or concerns about their promptness and effectiveness can be directed to the ISGRC. This committee ensures that hostel management is held accountable and operates efficiently.

Process of Redressal

The redressal process with the new mechanism involves several steps to ensure a thorough and fair resolution:

1. Submission of Grievance: Students can submit their grievances in writing to the appropriate committee.
2. Initial Review: The SGCC committee reviews the grievance and guides the students to the redressal mechanisms already in place. If they have exhausted those sources or there are none then it sends the grievance to the ISGRC. 
3. Decision making: The ISGRC is required to reach a decision within a recommended time frame of 30 days. If a Fact-Finding Committee (FFC) is needed, the committee is granted additional days to reach its decision. The constitution of FFC is open to the discretion of the ISGRC only.
4. Protection Measures: Safeguards are in place to protect students from any negative repercussions due to raising grievances, ensuring confidentiality and fairness. 

A report which summarises the grievances anonymously will be released on a yearly basis. The report would include the following:

a. Nature of the complaint

b. Action recommended by the committee(s) and those which were undertaken

c. Timeline of redressal

According to our discussion with the Dean AP, the convenor will determine who has access to this report. If the report is deemed sensitive, it will be restricted to designated authorities only.

By implementing this structured approach, IIT Bombay aims to create a responsive and transparent environment for addressing student grievances, thereby enhancing the overall student experience and institutional harmony.

Insight’s Opinion  

In the following section, we present our opinion on certain matters related to the formation and implementation of the grievance redressal committees.

Considerations about the remit of ISGRC

The report proposes the Institute Student Grievance Redressal Committee (ISGRC). However, the roles of these committees overlap with those of existing bodies, and there is a lack of clarity on when ISGRC can be approached.

From our current understanding of the committee, it acts like an apex body to resolve grievances inside the institute. One can approach the ISGRC whenever they are not satisfied with any decision taken by the specific bodies responsible for the issue. There is a possibility that it may undermine the existing structures as the losing party will always appeal against the existing body’s decision and approach ISGRC. Not only does this moot the authority of existing bodies to some extent, but it also brings in unnecessary delays in going through the whole process twice. We have detailed a few instances of confusion below. Also, Insight feels that there is a need for a detailed document that outlines the type of cases which may be eligible for reconsideration by the ISGRC similar to Article 132(1), 133(1) or 134 which does the same for appealing cases in the high court to the Supreme court.

There is also a lack of clarity on where ISGRC lies in the current hierarchy of the system. It is still unclear whether it has power over authorities, for instance, the Deans. Considering the proposed committee only comprises 5 members (2 professors + 3 student representatives) it also seems unlikely for such a small committee to handle all the issues in time. Although Fact Finding Committees can be created for every issue, this can also be a long procedure. Further, considering that the primary aim of these committees was to provide students a platform where they could get their issues resolved in an unbiased manner, the fact that the committee is limited to a size of 5 members, may increase chances of potential bias or conflicts of interest. We feel that the administration should consider appointing a pool of members, from which a 5-member committee can be selected on a case-by-case basis and availability. This can be essential to handle multiple cases simultaneously and eliminate a chance of probable conflicts.

Additionally, many institutes like IIT Gandhinagar have appointed a 3rd party ombudsman to seek their inputs in order to invite a broader perspective. The original idea was to have a similar ombudsperson system, to have an unbiased solution to the conflicts on campus. In an interview with Prof. Prita Pant, head of the SGRPC, we got the following response about including external counsel: “As far as student grievances or misdemeanours are concerned, IITB has its own mechanisms to address them. We do not report them to external agencies because the students are young, and we do not want their career/future to be adversely affected. Additionally, I believe an internal agency has another advantage. They know the system here, and hence may be able to resolve issues faster than an external ombudsperson.” However, Insight believes that after the implementation of the present SGRCs and as per need, the administration can look towards appointing external people to the committee and enforce strict measures to ensure confidentiality. This can help not only with potential overburdening of the committee with cases but may also give the complaining party more confidence in the decision taken, as long as strict confidentiality is maintained.

Some examples of potential clashes with the existing structure are given below

1. ISGRC vs. DPGC (Department Postgraduate Committee):

The report suggests that the Institute Student Grievance Redressal Committee (ISGRC) would address grievances, including those related to conflicts during PhD programs. Traditionally, such matters fall under the responsibility of the Department Postgraduate Committee (DPGC), which is already tasked with managing these issues. Similarly, the Department Undergraduate Committee (DUGC) handles undergraduate-related grievances.

If the ISGRC’s role is to intervene when the mechanisms of the DPGC or DUGC are perceived as insufficient, the report could benefit from providing clearer criteria or specific examples of when and how this intervention would occur.

2. Grievances Related to Academic Policies:

The report addresses concerns such as “sudden changes in grade policy.” Given that professors in IITs generally have autonomy over course structure and policies, the specific role or influence of the Institute Student Grievance Redressal Committee (ISGRC) in these situations is not clearly defined. 

3. Hostel related issues:

For issues related to hostels, the GSHA, the hostel specific council, hall manager, and warden currently serve as the primary point of contact for addressing these concerns. The involvement of the Institute Student Grievance Redressal Committee (ISGRC) in these matters could be seen as an additional layer of support, particularly if the existing authorities are unable to resolve certain issues. 

4. Accountability of Student Bodies:

The report proposes that the Institute Student Grievance Redressal Committee (ISGRC) could play a role in ensuring the accountability of student bodies. However, this responsibility already falls within the remit of the General Secretaries (GS) and the Dean of Students Affairs (Dean SA). 

The report could further clarify how the ISGRC’s involvement would complement the existing accountability mechanisms already in place.

Regarding the need for an SGCC

The SGCC is described as a body that directs students to the appropriate committee for their grievances. It is essentially made up of the GSAA (UG), GSAA (PG) and the GSHA. If implemented effectively, this could streamline the grievance process by helping students navigate the system more efficiently. However, this committee doesn’t appear to serve any other purpose apart from redirecting students to other existing committees, without addressing core issues.

Further, it is unclear how only three student representatives or their nominees will be able to redirect the traffic of diverse complaints and queries, which may or may not be under the purview of their respective existing responsibilities as part of their respective councils. Thus, it is expected that these student representatives or their nominees are trained about the variety of specific cases, and the bodies or their sub-bodies which may be able to help the concerned complainant.

To truly enhance accessibility, Insight feels that the SGCC may be supported by a dedicated website, similar to those established for the Gender Cell and the PwD (Persons with Disabilities) Cell. This website could serve as a centralised hub where students can register their complaints, find answers to frequently asked questions (FAQs), and access information on commonly faced grievances. 

Challenges in Implementation

The initial proposal of a student grievance redressal mechanism, brought up by the 2021-22 General Secretaries, faced significant delays even before its formal establishment. Although the discussions for drafting a policy started in 2021-22, the report wasn’t published until January 2024. Following this, the two faculty members constituting the committee had to be nominated by the director, to formally establish the committee. However, based on our inquiry with the administration, this crucial final step has still not been completed to the best of our knowledge.

The Policy Making Committee members remain unaware of the reasons behind the delay in establishing the proposed committee, despite the substantial efforts that were made while drafting the structure and scope of the committees. Meanwhile, Insight feels that a consistent push from the three student representatives, who are supposed to be a part of these committees, can help in quickening the process of its establishment, considering that the proposal for establishing this committee was a student-driven initiative from the previous tenures. 

Additionally, the delays in implementation might as well be attributed to the regular transition of leadership in both administrative and student positions, within defined tenures. To ensure seamless progress, it is essential that ongoing policies from the previous tenure are carried forward in the new term with consistent momentum. This would help the student representatives to initiate work on student-friendly policies which may be completed in a later tenure, without being demotivated by the point that it is not worthwhile to work on a policy that will take longer than a single tenure.

However, the current student representatives have the opportunity to address these issues. By advocating for the finalization and helping in the committee’s effective implementation, the original intent of providing a reliable grievance redressal mechanism for students can be fulfilled.

Conclusion

A centralized and unbiased system for student grievance redressal holds will go a long way to positively transform campus life by addressing unresolved or inadequately handled issues. While the initiative of the SGRC is commendable, it is crucial to ensure that these committees do not become redundant which only exist on paper but instead act as pillars of support for students.

Editorial Credits: Amogha Pote, Pratham Srivastava, Shubham Agarwal, Taniishq Kadam

Design Credits: Anjali Baghel

0