What would say is your favourite part about being who you are and doing what you do? Because you are one of the few people who actually get to do what they love.

I love the surprising places that poetry takes me. And I love the surprising people that I get introduced to through poetry. There are so many people I’ve met because they found poetry in their lives and I found poetry in mine, and somehow our lives have just connected. And these are folks I would never have otherwise been able to find, and I love that.

We couldn’t help but notice how it’s a majority of women who’ve attended this workshop. We were wondering if that’s common across the board for the other workshops you’ve conducted or in the spoken word poetry scene in general?

That’s so interesting. In the States I think it’s actually more male-dominated. There’s more male spoken word poets or at least (laughs) they are a louder presence, shall we say. But I think I’ve found that in Asia, I mean it isn’t a blanket statement, there are a lot of different countries in Asia (laughs), but in my experience here I have found that there are a lot of women who respond to this art form because it’s an opportunity to write ourselves out of the margin and reclaim narratives that maybe haven’t been written for us or people who have tried to write for us, instead of letting us speak for ourselves. I think there is something particularly powerful about that. So I am not surprised that there are a lot of women here. I think it’s awesome.

So it’s not just because women are more angsty?

(Laughs) It could be that too, but I think even that is powerful, right? The fact that instead of sitting at home with those feelings you are attempting to put them into words and share them with other people is a powerful choice. No matter what their feelings are.

You’ve been to India a couple of times before, right? What’s your favourite part about it?

India is a big place. (laughs) This is my first time in Bangalore, though, which I’m really excited about. So what’s my favorite part? Does food count? (laughs) I could probably eat Indian food every single day and be happy for my whole life. But my answer would be the colours. There’s so much color in India, that there isn’t anywhere else. And I yearn for it when I leave, and as soon as I get back here I’m thrilled to find it again. Simple things right, like cars. In the States, the cars are only black and grey and dark blue and maybe, red. And here there is every color on the streets around me. Obviously women’s dresses and Saris. That colour is so powerful in terms of altering my mood, I think. So I love that.

What is one wish you have for the coming year? For yourself, for the world, for anything?

Those are different categories. For the world, I really hope that the US does not fuck up this elections. (laughs) We all hope. That’s a big hope. I hope that this event, the NYPS, is just the beginning and I hope that it exposes to a lot of young artists to this art form, who haven’t maybe found it yet. Or who have and didn’t know that there is a community that existed for them. And I hope that when I return next year, or the year after that, that this event is even bigger and stronger with more diversity of voices, which I think there is definitely room for.

If you have one line only, which you can share with someone who is starting out as a writer, or someone who wants to write, what would it be?

Don’t be afraid of writing bad poems. You have to write bad poems in order to figure out how to write better poems. The worse thing that people do is that they write one bad poem and they go, uh-oh, I guess I’m not good at this. I should just quit. It doesn’t work that way. I write bad poems every day. So don’t be afraid of that.

What do you think of the expectations students have from college now that is has become famous and very well known?

You all have a better Family Law course, I can tell you that. (laughs) But it’s true. Now there are higher expectations of the students, that’s right. And the thing is that the teachers now are teaching fewer courses. Earlier, some of them would teach two courses, or a group of three would teach two or three courses. That must have been hard for them. So definitely the expectations are different.

Do you see a difference in how students generally conduct themselves?

The student body is not a body anymore. In the sense that you all don’t really come together to do anything. It’s all either delegated to your representatives or most people don’t care. Earlier, people did. If anyone needed some fundraiser done, everyone would come together. There was no question of not having quorum at GBMs. Now you can’t have quorums at GBMs. There will be no political participation by students at any level. And also in terms of personal interaction. If somebody’s sick, hardly anyone goes to the hospital to see them.

India has some really good educational institutions, say IISc or NLS, but they do not feature as significantly as other universities of the world. Moreover, ground-breaking solutions to world’s biggest problems are not emerging from our country. What do you believe is the cause?

The process of changing higher education has to start with changing our primary and secondary education. The reason we don’t have higher education institutions that have made world shattering discoveries in any field is simply because we do not help our children apply what they learn in the classroom to first understand the nature around them, and then to design solutions that make life better. Now, for example, why do you think the sun looks red when it is setting?

It has to be with dust particles … refraction …

You’re almost there. When refraction happens, red is the longest wavelength.

Yes, It has to do with scattering, right? And when it scatters, when the sun is setting, it travels the longest path through the atmosphere – and red has the longest wavelength. But the point I was making is, we don’t ask children this. For example, when you go to the moon, say in the afternoon, what will you see there? Do you see a bright sky, a dark sky, what would you see?

There is no atmosphere, so you’ll see the normal dark sky.

Because there is no atmosphere, there is no scattering, therefore it looks like there is night, but the sun is still there. It’s very bright. But the point I’m making is simply this – we do not teach children these concepts in this way. If we want that India discovers and creates an institution in the top thirty or twenty in the world, first the quality of the students has to improve. It’s not the fault of the students – they’re bright! But they’ve been taught all along to learn by rote. They’re not given the opportunity to question. That is where the work has to start. It cannot be done at IITs, or NLSIU, or IISc. It has to be done at primary and secondary schools.

In foreign universities, especially in the United States, university students play a large part in influencing policy. How do you think we can improve that in India with our existing institutions?

It requires our bureaucracy to become more open-minded. The biggest bottleneck we have right now is our bureaucracy. You see … politicians come and go – they also face elections once in five years so to some extent they feel they are accountable. Therefore, they can be convinced. But bureaucrats are there all the time. And the Indian babu is the most rigid one. It’s the most fixed-mindset one. So therefore, if we all sat down and said how do we make sure that every one of our MPs has a research arm wherein bright students like you can go and find employment or can even do internship and look at one issue of public policy … that is the way. But unfortunately … you see, we wanted to provide research grants to MPs for hiring people like you. Unfortunately, the government was against it. They said you can’t do this, it’s not right. Only when we become open-minded, when we are willing to learn from people who have done work in these fields, is when we will improve. The best thing to do is to allow youngsters freedom.

Do you think one of the biggest challenges India faces today is ‘brain-drain’? You have lots of great minds coming out of Indian universities but American universities poach them all because they’re given better opportunities.

I don’t think you should use the word ‘poached’. It’s not the right thing. See, as a citizen of India, you are entitled to a passport. You can decide to go to any country you want. You can live wherever you want. You can study wherever you want. I used to be the Chairman of the Rhodes selection committee for five years. Every year we selected one student from this campus. There were so many people who applied! No one is putting pressure on them to apply. No one is poaching. Youngsters find that going to Oxford is a great privilege, studying there is a great privilege. It provides great opportunities. The solution for us is to make our institutions as famous as Oxford. Then automatically, children will stay here. Why will they want to go?

Since you’re in the technology sector, a huge debate is happening right now regarding net neutrality and it ties into the issue of how we get internet access for the next billion people in the world. A lot of people say that Facebook’s idea of Free Basics should be encouraged because at least they’re trying to do something, while others disagree because they think it will principally change the structure of the Internet. What is your view on this?

I think net neutrality is very very important. The impact and the power of internet is access to information from a wide variety of sources. In some cases, competing sources. So therefore, any mechanism that may even remotely slow down that process or create obstacles for that process should be opposed. Therefore, I think net neutrality is very important for a country like India. The day you say, “anyway these people don’t have access, so let’s give them some access” … it’s a kind of elitism.

That is also the accusation against people who support net neutrality, that they are elitist.

You see, it’s like good values. You have to be honest. What is elitist about being honest? What is elitist about everyone having reasonably fast good access to internet?

What is the number one reform that India needs right now?

I would say that if there is one reform that is so important for India, it is to completely liberalize education. Just as in 1991, we did economic liberalization leading to the resurgence of the Indian industry. Allow private universities. Allow foreign universities. Allow any professor to come and teach here. Allow any instructor to go wherever they want. Let the market decide! See I’ll tell you before 1991, I used to ask a lot of my friends who were in the ’67 batch of IAS – now they’ve all retired – why don’t we have current account convertibility? They would say, “No no no, this would be a very bad step. People will stash money and that’s why we’re not allowing it.” But in 1991, in a matter of one week, thanks to Narsimha Rao, we introduced current account convertibility. Today we have 350 billion dollars in foreign exchange, at that time we had 1.5 billion. Unfortunately, even though we have seen the positive impacts of economic liberalization, we have still not passed that on to our education system. What medium you want to  study, or want your child to study – that should be left to you.  You know what the result is – we have deprived the poor the access to good education. We have deliberately kept them down.

Recently in NLS, there has been an interest in starting up. What do you think an institution like NLS can do to promote this entrepreneurial spirit?

University is all about education. Education is all about learning to learn, right? Whatever helps you to learn the power of entrepreneurship – there’s nothing wrong. For example, if you take a couple of electives on finance, on strategy, on choosing an idea, validating it – that would be good. Why not? Something like an Entrepreneurship I and II. If you don’t like it, don’t take it. That’s the beauty of an elective, right? It would act as an enabler.

Sadly, electives find no place in NLS to this date. But given that the new year has just begun, what would be your one wish for India to happen in 2016?

I think every expert, every thinker has provided data to show that having GST will make life simpler for business people, for governments, for consumers … for everybody. I hope that this will be passed in 2016. You know, UK came to a point similar to this in 1974. 41 years ago. I was working in France at that time. They just did it, 3 months … finished.

Abdal Akhtar mentions on Lawctopus of how he thinks that the current format of UPSC is most suited to law students. What is your opinion?

I do agree that the Mains format is suited to law students but I would qualify that by saying that this exam is not about any single stage or paper. You need to perform consistently well across 3 stages (prelims, mains and interview). So while being from Law school might help with writing answers in the Mains – it could equally boomerang against law students. I know of several people from law school who called me and said they were having difficulty in being concise and informative because our first reaction as law schoolites is to put in some faff, be a little verbose. Habits which could lead to elimination if not checked.

So yes, use your legal knowledge and skills but also remember to tone down the faff, the tendency to be verbose, or to take excessively critical or opinionated stands.

Also remember that during your interview, the standards they will have in terms of how you articulate your stand will be exceptionally high and on a bad day this could actually work against you. I personally know a couple of seniors who got hustled during the interview with the familiar “But you’re from NLS! How do you not know this?”

What values did you pick up at JSA and Luthra? Could you have made it to Rank 14 without spending years at JSA and Luthra?

JSA is a truly wonderful firm and if the kind of work it did (regulatory litigation) was more interesting, I would have totally stayed back there. It is possibly the most democratic and equitable Tier 1 Law firm I have been in. I do have a principled objection to family run  and promoter driven firms but at the end of the day, money talks.

I have not been at Luthra and Luthra long enough to comment, but I am thankful to both firms for not firing me even though there were months when I must have billed 5 rupees.

I honestly do not know if I could- I would not venture into such conjecture but yes without JSA none of the vacations or the BMW would have happened! So for that I am thankful!

There are a lot of Law Schoolites preparing for civil services at the moment. Any specific advice for them?

At the risk of repetition please do this exam only if you are sure you are going to love studying for it.

Do not do it because you think Law firms are boring or you want to be an “IAS.” Carefully weigh the pros and cons of your decision. I am sure I will crib when I get my first Government of India pay cheque in September 2015- But let’s hope the 7th Pay commission redeems my decision!

Always have a good backup- I have no qualms in admitting that on a bad day I could have ended up with Rank 400 and this exam requires as much luck as it does hard work. So give it your best shot- Do what you can do from your side and leave the rest to destiny-

Most importantly do not treat success or failure in this exam as a reference point of your abilities- Be resilient if you fail and move on- Be humble and level headed if you succeed. All the best!

Which course in Law School changed you the most and why?

This is a difficult one! I do not think I can name any one single course which changed me as such. Looking back at my Law School days, I do think the combined effect of the faculty and the peer group did shape the way I thought about a lot of things. But I think the three most memorable courses in no particular order have to be:

History: I do not think Lizzie and I ever got along with each other and I am sure we both had very strong views about each other’s ideologies/personality types, etc. But looking back, I think History was the first course where you realize the power of interpretation – the role of editorial/historical/journalistic bias and how not to take anything you ever read for granted. It really does teach you how to question and critically analyze so many issues which you otherwise wouldn’t have given much thought. I definitely would like to believe that over time I became far less of an entitled prick I was in my first year.

Economics: Somu’s one liners. The trouble he takes to keep students engaged in the course and the kind of rigour with which you need to read just to pass. I think even though I was a science student I developed a keen interest in Economics which helped me later on during my UPSC prep days.

Constitutional Law: Sudhir Krishnaswamy threatened us that if we did not read the actual text of the case law he quoted in class we would sink like stones. He kept his word. It was possibly the first (and last) time I ever read the actual judgments for a law school course!

What is your one regret from your time at Law School?

I think I did not do justice to my college education. I was pretty lazy and laid back and undisciplined. Most extra-curricular activities took place over the weekends and I was usually chilling in Hyderabad at that time. As long as I didn’t get too many repeats and was never in danger of losing a year I didn’t care much for academics. I hope the path I have chosen helps me redeem 5 years of laziness and debauchery!

What is your favourite memory of Law School?

During my first year we were in charge of chaperoning a lot of senior judges and bar council members. I was messing around with my batchmate George’s phone but inadvertently sent a “What’s up asshole” to [an unnamed senior dignitary]. The problem was he had the number stored and was livid with the hospitality committee and started blasting some of my seniors who had no clue what was going on because he thought one of them was George. In the meantime these guys called me to clarify, but by then I had already taken the cab which was supposed to pick him up to the Brigade Road Subway because I was really hungry. The end result was we got show caused by EMC, which banned us from stepping out for a week. This resulted in a turf war with SDGM whose then convenor personally took me out of the campus to prove a point. Needless to say, I was never allowed to pick up any NLS guest ever again and cab usage was strictly monitored.

In an interview elsewhere you spoke of ‘NLS Values’ and experiences opening your eyes to a whole new world and expanding your horizons. Could you elaborate on these values or experiences?

Before I came to NLS, I lived in a pretty rarefied atmosphere and never gave serious social or political issues much thought. I also had this myopic view of merit and thought that I am here in this college because I am the 27th best possible candidate in that year. I had a rather existentialist view on a lot of issues – yes, the world is an unfair place. Too bad. But I think over time I became much more aware of issues like caste/class/religion – their complexity and how difficult it is to actually find solutions. Whether it is discrimination faced by Dalits or women or Muslims or any other marginalized groups – I now realize that there are some serious structural issues that we as a country need to solve if we can even hope to achieve a modicum of inclusive growth.

We keep hearing the phrase “Falling Standards of Law School”? What do you make of this phrase? Do you think the standards are actually falling?

I honestly think no single individual or senior has any aukaad to pass judgment on the standards of law school as they were/are. A lot of idiots just say that to feel better about themselves rather than make a serious point or contribute in any way to the solution.

Having said that, I do believe that academic standards have been relaxed between my time in first year and fifth year. I don’t think it would be proper to comment on what they were in 2004 and what they are now because I honestly have no idea. Some faculty members did tend to resort to very ad hoc marking patterns. I am sure the institution does have several problems but a lot of them are not unique to NLS alone. But I would like to believe that relative to other institutions, law school is still better off, even though we may have a lot of ground to cover and actually realize our full potential.

SDGM has become a controversial committee in Law School in recent years, how did you deal with SDGM in your time here?

SDGM was the bane of my existence in first year and I think I had a record number of show causes, I can’t be sure but around 10 or 11. But to be fair to them, while a lot of us might like absolutely no restrictions on our freedom to smoke or drink or do whatever else, I do strongly believe that someone has to do that thankless job. The problem arises when some of the members go on a power trip and make a special effort to target certain people they don’t like or be assholes in general. I think a fair bit of give and take is involved on both sides. I never got into too much trouble with SDGM after first year, although I do remember having this one birthday party at Nyx where I happily went home but a lot of other guests landed up late and drunk at 1AM at Gate 1. It was dubbed the Keshavananda Bharati show cause with some 30 people getting show caused in one of the classrooms in the Acad. Ah, good times.

There are a lot of first years reading this interview, anything in specific that you would like to say to them?

Law school will probably suck in the first few weeks or month – You are away from home – dumbass seniors will be asking you for your top 5 or trying to engage in needless debate over whether Bengal is better than Bihar or AP is better than Telangana- I kept thinking of going back to NALSAR in my first month. But I have no doubt that the next 5 years are going to be the best 5 years. Don’t waste these years drinking on the terrace or being an over competitive asshole in the library- Find a good balance and I’m sure you guys will kill it.

On a lighter note, Ganga or Cauvery?

I was in Ganga but Cauvery was where the party was at.

What was your standard order at Rohini?

At Rohini, it was dal tadka and kadhai chicken. But I usually ate at Peking. 

Are there any aspects of the student body that you particularly appreciate?

I appreciate not any aspect, but many aspects of the student body. The debating culture that Badrinarayanan Seetharaman (Batch of 2013) started is marvellous. He started it four years ago and now look at the metamorphosis that we have witnessed. Anil Sebastian Pulickel and Aniruddha Basu are God-sent. They are like the Sachin Tendulkar and Rahul Dravid of debating. The idea of debating has caught on and it has come to stay. The way NLS debates is something to be proud of. When I walk back daily and see students preparing for debates, it is a visual splendor. I used to be a student and it used to be hectic even without all the gadgets of today. How you find that extra minute for everything is amazing. I always believe it is only a busy person who finds time. If somebody says he doesn’t have time it means he doesn’t know how to organize his time and it is just what we call bahana or excuse. The SBA initiative where senior students mentor the juniors is something extraordinary. This culture of when a first year joins and in the first fifteen days we make them feel at home and part of the family of National Law School is in my opinion the unique practice of our college. That’s the aspect I like the most.

What is your short term vision and long term vision for Law School?

I always say a vision requires revision because we are in a world where today’s knowledge is tomorrow’s ignorance. The pace at which things are moving is amazing and therefore my only vision is to live up to the ever increasing and ever demanding expectations of the stakeholders, including my students. The expectations of parents, judges, jurists is something that has to be seen to be believed and my vision in the short term and long term is to firmly put NLS at the top place, where it deserves to be.

In the long term, a juxtaposition of science, technology and law is the need. Just to illustrate, you can’t study technology or engineering in isolation without having knowledge of law. Now there is DNA profiling and genetic engineering. Therefore NLS in the next decade would be focusing on the interplay of law, science and technology. The second priority is restoring the confidence level of people in the various institutions which our society has so assiduously built. When I look at the scenario I ask myself if there is a crisis of confidence in our institutions, like our electoral democracy, judicial system etc. The answer to how to restore it seems to be to focus on good governance. That’s the reason we have started the MPP course. This is my long term vision for the college, because people tell me if anyone can do it, it is only NLS and with all humility,  I feel proud of this institution.

What are the daily challenges you encounter in running your office?

Every challenge is an opportunity for me. Therefore I don’t feel like I’m encountering any challenges at all. Even when students come to me I always feel every student has a problem, but the student itself is not the problem. It all depends on how you look at it. Even if students come to me at 11PM in the night, I welcome them with a smile because I want them to go back with a smile. So every challenge is an opportunity. A school teacher of mine taught me one fundamental dictum of Winston Churchill: A successful person is one who finds an opportunity in a calamity and an unsuccessful person is one who sees a calamity in an opportunity.

I don’t really find any daily challenge in my job. If you join a job you like, you never work at all. Look at the way you people work for twenty five hours a day for Spiritus and Admit One, and at 9AM you are back in the class even when your body metabolism orders you to rest. This shows you have the spirit and I try to imbibe values like that. The only challenge is to keep NLS on the highest pedestal. If angels fall, it makes news, and NLS is of angelic proportions. No doubt about it.

Some sections within the NLS community believe that NLS has been experiencing falling standards, both in terms of students and faculty. What is your opinion on the same?

I completely disagree with it.  First, let me focus on students. The top ranking students come to NLS out of the 40,000 seekers. And these students are amazingly talented. Maybe this is my ego but year after year I find that standards are going up. But perhaps expectations are going up and greater the expectations greater the disappointment. Second, we have some of the best faculty at NLS. There are some faculty members who have been associated with Law School right from the day of it’s baptism. Like the founding fathers of constitutions they are the founding fathers of NLS. Show me one law school where you have in succession three Chief Justice’s of India working as faculty members. Marc Galanter said that NLS is in the danger of becoming victim of its own success. It all depends on how you look at it and therefore I don’t subscribe to the view that standards are falling.

In light of some really good colleges in the recent years do you believe that NLS would continue to maintain its foremost position? 

There are many good institutions now and I think the presence of such institutions is very good. It prevents us from becoming complacent. I also think that an achievement becomes meaningless once you achieve it. An institution like NLS cannot bank on its past. The moment you try to bank on the past you become fossilized, anachronistic, and out of circulation. The healthy competition we have from other institutions always motivates us to be above them. My final statement in this regard is that NLS is imitated by many but bettered by none. It is like a pole star, it will continue to be a pole star.

Our college is a highly liberated and open campus, but at this moment there is a raging discussion happening within the student body about how, in some some cases, the attitude of college administration, more particularly the college guards and our mess/disciplinary committees, is highly sexist. Were you aware about this and what is your opinion on this?

I was not aware about this. We have to understand that NLS is part of a larger society. I have seen many institutions, and comparatively, our college is very liberal. I also believe that a raging discussion is a positive sign. The word sexist does not exist in my lexicon. As far as guards are concerned, whenever there has been a complaint regarding their attitudes, action has been taken immediately. Our college is a small place, where everyone knows each other and speaks without any prejudices. Law School is a place where liberty, in the holistic sense of the term, is granted and that’s its brand value. If there is any problem, my office is always open. There is no iron curtain and no ungodly hour. My dictum has always been passion for what I do and compassion for whom I do. Students are welcome to come anytime and meet me regarding any issue.

It would be wrong to assume that everything is perfect. That would indeed make Marc Galanter’s statement true. At a very basic level, what problems would you identify as existing problems in NLS?

I believe that perfection is always an ideal. If you think everything is perfect then unwittingly complacency will seep in. Sometimes I ask myself, are we really coping with expectations and demands of the course curriculum and delivery system in classroom? Are we responding to the bigger things students aspire towards? I’m always cognizant of this fact and it keeps me on my toes. If we fail to meet the expectations of student community, then something is wrong with us and not the students. I also want students to remember one thing. Please always remember standard of life is more important that standard of living.

Sometimes students get frustrated at institutions in our college but feel they shouldn’t raise their voice for they are afraid. A previous edition of Quirk from 2005 carries an article by a foreign exchange student from Osgoode Law School wherein he says that he felt no revolutionary zeal at NLS. What would is your message to such students?

There is a similar debate raging all over the country. Have students lost their revolutionary zeal and have they also started believing that change will come through evolution and not through revolution? Everyone says our defiant spirit of the 70s and 90s is no longer found. I respectfully disagree. Today students are not prepared to settle for even the second best and they only want the best. We were never this aspirational, we were content with what we were getting. I think their revolutionary zeal is not patently manifested but latent and if one understands the body language of the students, they will be able to see the fire and spark in them.

I also think students in NLS do not have any problem with raising their voice against issues. They may not raise their voice collectively, but individually my students openly discuss with me performance of different stakeholders. I always give them a free hand because I approach any issue with an open mind. Many times in the past they have raised their voice and I have done my best to solve their problems.

What is the SDGM policy on student discipline this year and how is it different from earlier years?

Raghuveer Meena (Meena): Earlier, some SDGM conveners, after conducting show causes would go sympathise with the person concerned. Now we don’t. For example, if I caught Shikhar and told him he will be DARICed, I should not later go and tell him that it is all fine and he’ll get off. That is bad policy. This year, we have assigned good and bad cops within the committee.

Do you think that there should be a codification of SDGM’s powers and procedure of conducting raids?

Meena: I don’t support the codification of rules, else people will try to unfairly gain advantage. Also, rules rely upon interpretation as well. If we start reading the rules, people will get DARICed. At present, the third offence mandates a DARIC, but we don’t ever do that. We put such cases under miscellaneous, and take whatever action the committee as a whole thinks is appropriate.

Sikander Wankhede (Sikander): Ultimately ours is a small college. Everyone knows everyone by name and their personality. We wouldn’t like to screw another person’s life. Take the case of Shikhar, who said that he didn’t want to DARIC a batchmate of his, so we considered the case as unique and under the the miscellaneous category, imposed a fine and grounding.

Some of the hostel rules, like loitering, are ridiculous. Why have they not been gotten rid of?

Meena: We have tried to get rid of them but it hasn’t happened. We have made attempts to change our name from ‘Security’ to ‘Student,’ but the warden has told us that we will have to speak to the Registrar, for which we’ll have to obtain an appointment. Thereafter, consultations will need to be conducted with the VC and UGC, because whenever hostel rules are amended, they need to be put before the Executive Council. Ultimately, we have decided that these rules don’t matter as we don’t have to ever use them. There are a lot of silly rules, like one against trolling.

The fine for missing room check has been increased to Rs. 1000 from Rs. 150. What is the reason for that?

Meena: Rs. 150 was a fine for miscellaneous violations. Rs. 1000 was the fine for missing perm in the rules. This year we were told to implement these fines. There is no fine for room check, as the system of room check was created after the incident of murder happened.

We spoke to the warden and told him Rs.1000 is too much. We are changing it to Rs. 300, as we feel Rs. 150 is too insignificant to be taken seriously.

Rs. 1000 fines and grounding has always been in the rules. Gopika and I went through the previous ten years rules and it has always been there. We believe we have to determine fines and impose suspended punishments using our discretion.

Sikander: For codification we feel that it becomes a court of law. Decisions are appealed and defense and prosecution are brought forth, which I feel is not required in this college. You have mooting for these experiences. Making it a court of law is unnecessary. I didn’t like the idea of Aman Saxena making it that in his first year.

Doesn’t that prevent some sort of arbitrariness? Sometimes committees selectively enforce rules making the system unfair.

Meena: The deal is that you when you let someone off ten times, that person will not praise you or even recognise this fact, but when you put your foot down, he will approach the warden.

Moreover, if the timings of the raid are designated and the warden’s presence is made necessary, SDGM’s ability in conducting will be hampered. Also, the warden has his own life. He can’t always accompany us at 10 o’clock. Some sort of happy hours will come up.

What is your relationship with DISCO and do you think there should be parity in the rules? Could you also clarify the jurisdiction of both?

Meena: I must provide some context. There have been personal issues between conveners of SDGM and DISCO in the past, which have hampered their ability to work together.

Recently, when a girl was caught by SDGM on the New Acad terrace in violation of some rules, we had a separate show cause for her in the acad in the presence of DISCO members. This has been the practice since the sutta thing happened two years ago. In that incident, a guy smoking handed a cigarette to a girl and said SDGM did not have jurisdiction. That case forced us to create jurisdiction for SDGM in these special circumstances. Another time, a guy was show caused by DISCO for drinking at some quad party. Thus, there is overlapping jurisdiction. Gopika and I took the initiative and both reduced the fine to Rs.150. The committees get along this year. Recently, in an incident when we had to show cause our own batchmates both committees worked closely together. We think there should be parity in the punishments imposed.

Can you comment on the problems that the student body had with SDGM last year, such as the incident in which a first year faced harassment?

Sikander: I’ll explain the incident. We were taking their room checks but the first years were highly irregular. Some 10-12 people were missing it every day. This was never the case with other batches. We were shocked at this. Then we heard that some of them gone out for drinks before their Torts exam and got beaten black and blue. One day, Sarthak Gupta and I went and told them the realities and that they should not cross limits. One boy started laughing. He was laughing at me as a SDGM member and as a senior, which caused me to take offence. How can one do that? I asked him to shut up but he started laughing again, in front of the entire batch in the quad. I asked him to go outside Himalaya. This SF thing was happening and the student body was sending mails about moral policing and bashing SDGM on the college mail. So I was already pissed, we do work, don’t even get paid for it and get flak from the entire college for it. There were jokes being made about ‘undesirable mass gatherings.’ My junior members told me that he had written something about that. It was that morning that a student was robbed at knife point between Gate 3 to 1. So I was pissed that such things are happening, and I lambasted everyone. Just a week to prior to this, I had seen some first years on Surya terrace. We would write our local guardian’s name in perm letters in first year. These people were writing going to a movie, going for dinner to McD etc. How could they do this? This wasn’t allowed.

But why not?

Meena: I don’t have a problem, but the warden has a problem with it. It’s a policy that be strict with first years. Don’t go for a movie or anything at night. We suggest them to go with a senior for their safety. Why do you have to go for a show at 10 o’clock? That is the reason why the warden wants to maintain records, and when we tell first years that LG is the only place, we actually think they should write that. In first trimester, you are getting a hang of this place, how this place works, what it is about, what Nagarbhavi is like and the environment of the town. In later years, you can go to Pondicherry or Coorg or anywhere. That is fine with us, but not initially.

So do you think room check should be limited only to first trimester or second and third? Because by third trimester I think it’s largely unnecessary.

Meena: See the purpose of room check is not just safety but also to ensure that daily interaction with SDGM. That is it. It’s a basic thing we do to let people know that you shouldn’t break any rule. If they see the SDGM member shouting at one of their batch mates, they will have second thoughts about breaking rules.

Sikander: It’s not redundant. We have to keep them on campus after 8, because if they are found at Surya terrace at 10PM, anything can happen. And such things have happened in the past. We gave a similar orientation to the MPP first years, and some of them got drunk and there was a big fiasco over there which we came to know about later. Seniors in this college have been helpful to juniors in every way. They take them out, teach them how to drink, and give important life gyan. It is also important that you learn when and where to maintain silence. Essentially, you cannot be cool everywhere. The localities do not like you.

So you mentioned that you always face pressure from two ends, the students and the warden. How do you navigate this conflict?

Meena: The moment we join SDGM, we are taught two things. Sartaj told me that the people who don’t get disciplined by their parents will not be disciplined by us. And forget that people will love you for this work. We never think that if I’m raiding, people will love me and say ‘yes, please come raid my room’. It will always be ‘why the hell is he in my room?’. This is the nature of our committee. When I ask most people who don’t drink or smoke on campus why they didn’t join SDGM, they say that they fear their batchmates won’t be on good terms with them.

Sikander: I’ll tell you a very important thing in this regard. Last year, during a PFL match, there was a tiff between a spectator and a player. SDGM was asked to take action on this issue and I was completely against that. I won’t take suo moto action as SDGM. In the future, it will backfire, if we take suo moto action today. If we do this in a football match, later some idealistic guy will question why I’m not show causing drunk people in a Quad party. The coke is spiked. We know that well.

What if I’m smoking on the terrace, and my batch mate knows and comes there and then complains to you. Would you have complained about the batch mate if he went to the terrace if you’re not on SDGM? If they’re not making a ruckus or causing a problem.

Meena: Let him smoke.

Sikander: I don’t have any problem.

How do you think that in the past four years, the culture inside SDGM has changed? You’ve alluded to it.

Sikander: I have seen two sides of the coin. In my third year with Vishav, and in my fourth year, with Aditya Rathore. They were completely different. And now we are sticking to how it was when Vishav was there (Quirk team edit: We had earlier mentioned how Vishav had told Shikhar that SDGM was harsh on first years because they would start drinking and smoking eventually anyway, but would do so in their first year itself if the committee was lenient. The policy for senior batches was no-nuisance one). Or Sartaj, or Vagish. Zero tolerance policy can not work anywhere. We didn’t understand Aditya Rathore’s actions at last years Strawberry Fields. Why would he do that? Locking a terrace! It’s SF man. Jim Morrison also used to smoke up. I engaged with Aditya on this but he said that SDGM will stop this. I told him it doesn’t work like this.

What do you think the future is headed with this batch of junior members.

Meena: Next year, we are really doubtful. We both won’t be there. And Amber also won’t be there. Now there is only one senior member who is Tarun Rathore. And then there are all Shikhar’s batch mates.

Sikander: I can say that SDGM is quite in safe hands. Utkarsh and Jeydev are working well. They also have enough experience. They have been on the committee for two years. We have chosen the committee members personally after discussions with the warden, and we feel that we are all on the same page. And the committee members work as a team.

Meena: Right now the committee is in such a way that if Sikander will propose something, the entire committee will be in favor. They respect his experience.

Just for curiosity, do you guys take a vote? How do you decide on things?

Meena: Yes.

What do you do with all the alcohol that you confiscate?

Sikander: We drain it.

So last year that GBM happened and there was a vote to remove you. What did you do when you found out about this?

Sikander: I was present for the first two hours of the GBM but I had left for my hostel by the time this issue came up. Some of my friends told me that my name had come up, that I had fucked around with a junior and all that shit. But I was like chill, it’s okay, this happens with SDGM. Not a big deal. Then a mountain was made out of a mole hill, which was not required. Shrishti told one of her batchmates that Sikandar had agreed to all this. I never did. They took silence as assent.

So they never approached you after the allegations?

Sikander: No. No one approached me. Not a single person.

Meena: The warden asked the SBA if they had any evidence or anything.

Sikander: This happened later on. I wasn’t even told about the vote being taken for my removal or that there was resolution to remove me.

So the only thing that College/Ugstudents knew about the entire incident was the mail about your removal?

Sikander: Yes.

Meena: So SDGM never comes under the SBA. We are constituted directly under the warden. They can’t pass a resolution against an SDGM member.

Sikander: As they don’t have the power to appoint me, how can they remove me?

It was just supposed to be persuasive, right?

Sikander: At least you should give me a chance. Principles of natural justice were infringed over here. I was not given a fair chance. I don’t like saying these things as I don’t treat these matters like a court of law. I got to know about the vote for my removal when I was in class. I was like what the fuck has happened suddenly. I knew that I was going to lose. SDGM is not popular with people. And some girl brought some feminist perspective that SDGM is against girls as well. Girls on the house voted against me.

Meena: There is a false perception that there are people on the committee who judge if girls drink or smoke.

I guess it came with the idea that girls should leave the field early and all that.

Sikander: I personally feel that I was not given a chance and was not asked about what had happened. On the day of voting, the minutes of the meeting were sent by Vansh Gupta who accused me of drinking, and he didn’t even know me. I had never touched alcohol till then. So the voting happened and I got a 100 votes for me staying, without any sort of campaigning, because of the the people in my hostel and others who know me. After all of this had happened, at the end of the trimester I was asked for an apology from the SBA. I was informed by the warden that he had asked the SBA to submit evidence against me to him. In the interim, I was not to be appointed to a post in SDGM.

Meena: You’ll remember that Gopika was appointed as convener much before us, and Anil was assigned as convener before this, just because of the sheer stupidity of the SBA office bearers.

Sikander: And the warden till the end asked them to submit in writing why they were against me and why they did not want me to be part of the committee. His stance was that, “If you give me a valid reason, I’ll chuck him out of the committee.”

Meena: They didn’t reply to the mail.

The perception we had was that the admin wasn’t keen on removal because they weren’t bound by SBA resolutions. What you’re telling us is that SBA office bearers didn’t fulfil the burden of proof.

Sikander: One more interesting thing. I went to Anuja Ma’am’s room (the warden then) to ask her about this matter. She told me that she had no idea about this. She was very surprised to hear it. Also, Prashanth Sir was not on on campus and were equally unaware of this matter. The SBA office bearers told to the entire college about keeping the wardens in the loop, and how they wanted action against SDGM. Nothing was done on their end about this.