Prayagraj: The Vice-Chancellor of Dr. Rajendra Prasad National Law University (RPNLU), Prayagraj, Prof. Usha Tandon, has written to the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, placing before him a series of administrative concerns relating to University Registrar Varun Kumar Pandey and seeking appropriate intervention and guidance.
The communication, dated 28 September 2026, has been addressed to the Chief Minister in his capacity as Chairperson of the General Council of RPNLU. The Vice-Chancellor has stated that certain developments concerning the University’s administration, alleged non-compliance with her directions by the Registrar, and issues connected with Assistant Professor Dr. Deepak Sharma require consideration at the highest institutional level.
The letter expressly clarifies that it is not intended to prejudge or establish the liability of any individual. According to the Vice-Chancellor, show-cause notices have already been issued to the persons concerned and they are being given an opportunity to submit their explanations.
Concerns Raised Over Registrar’s Administrative Conduct
A central issue highlighted in the communication concerns the conduct of Registrar Varun Kumar Pandey.
The Vice-Chancellor has referred to instances in which, according to the letter, her administrative directions were allegedly not implemented or were not acted upon in the expected manner.
The communication refers to provisions of the Dr. Rajendra Prasad National Law University Act, 2020, while emphasising the Registrar’s responsibility to comply with directions issued by the Executive Council and the Vice-Chancellor and to properly discharge duties attached to the office.
The Vice-Chancellor has requested that the circumstances surrounding the Registrar’s conduct be examined in their entirety rather than being treated as isolated administrative events.
High Court Directions Also Referred to in Letter
The communication also refers to an order of the Allahabad High Court dated 16 September 2026 in Writ-C No. 37012 of 2026.
According to the Vice-Chancellor’s letter, the order included directions concerning the discharge of administrative responsibilities by Dr. Deepak Sharma. The Vice-Chancellor has alleged that the directions were not implemented in the manner expected and has sought scrutiny of the Registrar’s role in that regard.
The letter presents the issue not merely as an internal administrative disagreement but as one involving implementation of directions stated to arise from judicial proceedings.
Issue Concerning Warden Responsibility
Another matter referred to in the communication concerns the responsibility of warden of the boys’ hostel.
According to the Vice-Chancellor, the Registrar was directed to take over the responsibility, but allegedly did not do so. The letter further refers to subsequent communications concerning hostel administration being issued without the Vice-Chancellor’s approval.
The Vice-Chancellor has sought an examination of these circumstances in the context of the Registrar’s statutory and administrative responsibilities.
Communications With University Lawyers Under Scrutiny
The Vice-Chancellor has also sought clarification regarding communications allegedly made by the Registrar with the University’s legal cell and lawyers appointed on behalf of RPNLU.
The letter states that communications with advocates in matters concerning the University have institutional and legal consequences and should conform to the University’s authorised administrative structure.
The Registrar has consequently been asked to explain the basis and authority for such communications.
Confidential Examination Pen Drive Issue Flagged
The letter additionally raises an issue concerning a pen drive containing confidential examination-related material.
The Vice-Chancellor has sought an explanation regarding the circumstances in which the pen drive was allegedly handled or stored, emphasising that confidentiality of examination material is directly connected with the integrity of the University’s examination system.
The Registrar’s role, knowledge and administrative responsibility in relation to the matter have therefore been included among the issues requiring clarification.
Appointment Letters of Newly Selected Assistant Professors
The communication also refers to the alleged failure to issue appointment letters to certain newly selected Assistant Professors even after their selection had been approved by the Executive Council.
The Vice-Chancellor has noted that the Executive Council exercises significant powers relating to the University’s administration, management and control, and has sought scrutiny of the Registrar’s role in implementing decisions taken by the Council.
This issue has also been included in the show-cause proceedings initiated by the University.
Forensic Material Concerning Dr. Deepak Sharma Referred to
The Vice-Chancellor’s letter also makes reference to the University’s earlier Fact-Finding Committee and forensic examination concerning Assistant Professor Dr. Deepak Sharma.
According to the communication, a Fact-Finding Committee constituted on 31 August 2026 included a former IFS officer, a former IPS officer and former DGP, along with a digital forensic expert.
The letter states that confidential University documents relating to the recruitment and joining of Assistant Professors were recovered during examination of the laptop allotted to Dr. Sharma.
It further refers to proposed or unsigned Office Orders found in the electronic material in which the Registrar was shown as the proposed signing authority.
The Vice-Chancellor has emphasised that the circumstances require examination to determine whether any coordination, communication or shared administrative activity existed between the individuals concerned. At the same time, the letter makes clear that no final finding of collusion or wrongdoing has yet been reached.
Complaint Addressed to Chief Minister Recovered During Forensic Examination
Another issue highlighted in the communication concerns a Hindi complaint relating to alleged financial and administrative irregularities at the University.
The Vice-Chancellor states that the complaint was recovered during forensic examination from the Recycle Bin of the University laptop allotted to Dr. Sharma, with a recorded creation date of 15 August 2026.
However, the letter expressly states that forensic recovery alone does not conclusively establish who prepared or transmitted the complaint or under whose instructions it was prepared.
The Vice-Chancellor has therefore sought an independent and impartial examination of the circumstances surrounding the document.
Independent Forensic Examination Suggested
To strengthen the reliability and impartiality of the electronic evidence, the Vice-Chancellor has requested guidance on whether the original electronic device and relevant forensic images or material should be placed before an independent government forensic laboratory or another competent agency nominated by the State Government.
According to the letter, such an exercise could minimise future disputes concerning the credibility of the electronic evidence and the forensic process.
Interim Administrative Safeguards Sought
Pending completion of the inquiry and show-cause proceedings, the Vice-Chancellor has also sought guidance on whether interim administrative measures should be put in place to ensure that persons facing inquiry do not occupy positions from which records, electronic material or the inquiry process could potentially be affected.
The letter stresses that any such measure should remain temporary and administrative and should not amount to a finding of guilt.
Vice-Chancellor Seeks Guidance as General Council Chairperson
The Vice-Chancellor has ultimately requested the Chief Minister to examine the material placed before him in his capacity as Chairperson of the University’s General Council and provide appropriate guidance considered necessary in the University’s institutional interest.
The letter also seeks scrutiny of the Registrar’s conduct, implementation of Executive Council decisions and Vice-Chancellor’s directions, examination of the forensic material, consideration of an independent government forensic examination and protection of relevant records and evidence while proceedings remain pending.
The Vice-Chancellor has reiterated that the object of the exercise is not to hold any individual guilty at this stage, but to safeguard institutional discipline, administrative integrity, records and the fairness of the ongoing inquiry.