DINA NATH BATRA Vs. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition, purporting to raise an issue in public interest, assails an article by the renowned poet, translator, linguist and an internationally acclaimed scholar A. K. Ramanujan titled "three Hundred Ramayanas: Five Examples and Three Thoughts on Translation". Ramanujan, after a brilliant academic career in India, got his Phd in linguistics in 1963 from Indiana University in the U. S. He taught in several universities in that country till his death in july, 1993. A shortened version of the article first appeared in 1991 in a book titled Many Ramayanas: The Diversity of a Narrative Tradition in South Asia edited by Paula Richman and published by the University of California Berkeley press. The full version was also published in India in 1999 by the Oxford university Press in a book titled The Collected Essays of A. K. Ramanujan edited by Vinay Dharwadker. The article, therefore, has been in the public domain for over 17 years.

(2.) THE immediate provocation for this petition brought forth by eight petitioners, some of whom are academics themselves, is that this article was included in the list of readings for the concurrent course on 'ancient Indian culture' in the BA (Honours) programme offered in several colleges affiliated to the University of Delhi from July, 2006 onwards. It appears that this and certain other articles which were also listed in the readings in the published curriculum were separately photocopied and compiled in a spiral bound volume, which was purchased by petitioner No. 1 from Arun Thesis Typing Centre, respondent No. 4, a photocopying shop operating in the vicinity of the University of Delhi, respondent No. 1. The name of Dr. Upender Singh, a Professor in the department of History, arrayed as respondent No. 3 was found typed on the cover page of this spiral bound volume. Although this volume was neither a 'book', nor was it authored by Dr. Upender Singh, it appears to have led to a series of protests spearheaded by the Shiksha Bachao Andolan of which petitioner No. 1 claims to be the convener. The bone of contention was that the article denigrated the Ramayana and hurt the religious sentiments of the Hindus. The protests were joined in by certain other political social and religious groups. It appears from the copies of the press clippings enclosed with the petition that the print media also proceeded on the mistaken notion that this was a book published by respondent No. 1 authored by respondent No. 3. A criminal complaint also stated to have been filed by the petitioners.

(3.) ON January 23, 2008 in response to a letter received from Dr. K. C. Gupta, convener of the Gyan Parishad in Meerut, seeking deletion of the said article from the list of readings for the course mentioned hereinabove, the University of Delhi informed him as under: