Hoshiarpur, 26 September:- The university has strongly rejected allegations recently circulated in sections of the print and social media against the university and its senior officials, terming them "misleading, factually incorrect and part of a coordinated attempt to undermine the reputation of the institution."
The university said that the recent developments need to be viewed in the context of the ongoing dispute related to LTSU and former Chancellor Sandeep Singh Kaura, against whom an FIR has been registered at Kathgarh Police Station (Nawanshahr).
The university further said that the bail application filed by Mr Kaura had been rejected by the NRI Court, while he has not been arrested so far. The university stressed that the constitution of an SIT, by itself, does not amount to a judicial stay on arrest and that the matter remains within the jurisdiction of the competent investigating and judicial authorities.
The university said that the recent complaints raised by Rattan Kaur and Dr Navneet Chopra should be viewed in the context of their previous administrative and financial differences with the institution. It alleged that Ms Rattan Kaur was involved in corrupt practices.
According to the university, communications had been sent by both employees to several external authorities, including officials of NSDC, MSDE, UGC and the Punjab Government. The university said that since the names of the employees appeared in communications containing serious allegations against the institution, seeking explanations from them was a legitimate administrative step.
"Seeking an explanation from an employee whose name appears in a complaint against the institution is a normal administrative procedure. It cannot, by itself, be portrayed as harassment or victimisation," the university said.
The university also rejected allegations of sexual harassment or conduct affecting the dignity of women. It said that if any formal allegation of sexual harassment is made, the matter will be dealt with strictly in accordance with applicable law and by a duly constituted Internal Complaints Committee.
The university clarified that Dr Navneet Chopra was appointed as an Associate Professor and was subsequently assigned the additional administrative responsibility of Dean, Academic Affairs.
The university said that the position of Dean is an administrative assignment and not a separate permanent teaching appointment. Therefore, changes in such assignments are part of normal institutional administration.
The university denied that Dr Chopra's administrative responsibilities were changed on the basis of gender. It stated that no male faculty member was appointed in her place and that the responsibilities are currently being handled additionally by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor.
The university further said that differences had arisen between Dr Chopra and some faculty members and officials, and representations had been received from different sides. The university clarified that the committee was constituted for an administrative review and was not a disciplinary inquiry committee.
"Removal from an administrative assignment is not a punishment. Administrative responsibilities are assigned and changed from time to time in the interest of institutional functioning," the university said.
The university further said that Dr Chopra was subsequently offered the responsibility of Dean, Student Welfare, which she initially accepted before resigning from the assignment.
The university also categorically rejected allegations that it was "selling degrees." It said, "The university has not awarded any degree since its establishment. The allegation that the university is selling degrees is completely false and misleading."
At present, only two registered Ph.D. scholars are working under the supervision of a recognised and reputed professor and in accordance with UGC guidelines. The university also clarified that its Nursing programme commenced in July 2026 and that there was no previous batch of students in the programme.
The university said that the cumulative impact of the allegations and communications was damaging the institution and identified three major concerns: an attempt to damage the university's reputation and credibility; creating pressure and diverting attention from the ongoing legal proceedings against Kaura; and exerting pressure on university authorities in relation to administrative and institutional decisions.
The university appealed to the media and the public to verify facts and documentary records before reaching conclusions about the matters currently before the competent authorities.
