Union Education Minister Pralhad Joshi appealed for calm on October 27, 2026, as protests demanding the restoration of the Jamia Millia Islamia Students’ Union (JMISU) continued at Jamia Millia Islamia University in New Delhi. On the 16th day of the agitation, Joshi said negotiations were underway and urged protesters not to create a law-and-order problem.
The university has agreed to hold union elections within 15 days of approving the union constitution, but students continue to demand a definite timeline for that approval. Meanwhile, restrictions on campus movement, online classes and reports of alleged property damage have added to tensions.
On October 28, the university alleged that unidentified people had damaged campus gates and other property overnight; Delhi Police said no formal complaint had been received at the time of reporting. The dispute remains unresolved, with the university’s election assurance yet to translate into a confirmed poll schedule.
Students Seek Clarity
Speaking to reporters on the sidelines of the inauguration of the CBSE Experience Centre in Dwarka, Joshi said, “Negotiations are going on. Nobody should try to create a law and order problem. There is a body which is looking into it, including the Vice Chancellor.
They are taking care of it.” He added that efforts had been made to address the concerns raised by students. The minister’s remarks came as the university’s assurance failed to bring the agitation to an end. The immediate disagreement concerns the difference between promising elections and specifying when the process leading to them will be completed.
According to The Indian Express, the university’s October 26 order stated that JMISU elections would take place within 15 days of approval of the union constitution, but did not specify when that approval would be granted. Students have sought a formal commitment to complete the constitution-drafting and approval process by December 20, followed by an election notification within 15 days.
They have also raised concerns about disciplinary action against protesters and the conduct of campus security staff. The university’s order revoked suspension and show-cause notices issued during the protest and said a committee would investigate the actions of security personnel.
However, students objected to conditions attached to the order, including a proposed public apology over statements and social media posts concerning the administration. These differences have complicated efforts to reach a settlement.
A Prolonged Standoff
The protests began on October 12, with students demanding the restoration of the elected union, which has remained dissolved since 2006. Several students undertook an indefinite hunger strike, arguing that an elected body is necessary to represent students’ concerns before the university administration.
As the agitation continued, the university shifted classes and examinations online until November 8, citing the need to maintain safety and academic continuity. Students, however, opposed the move and complained that restrictions on campus entry and the closure of facilities, including libraries, had affected their daily lives. Some also raised concerns about access to essential facilities, particularly for women residing on campus.
The dispute escalated further on October 28, when the university alleged that a group of unidentified people, some reportedly wearing masks and carrying sticks, entered the premises overnight and damaged gates and other property. The university released video footage that it said showed people gathering near gates and climbing over them. Gate 4C and a gate near the university’s central mosque were among the locations reported to have sustained damage.
Delhi Police said no formal complaint had been filed in connection with the alleged vandalism at the time of reporting, and responsibility for the damage had not been established. Separately, restrictions under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita were reported around the campus, prohibiting assemblies and gatherings in the affected area.
These developments have widened the immediate challenge beyond the election dispute to include campus access, security, academic continuity and the need to prevent further escalation.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
A university should be a place where disagreements can be expressed, heard and resolved through dialogue rather than prolonged uncertainty or confrontation. Students seeking elected representation deserve a clear explanation of the process, a credible timeline and an opportunity to have their concerns addressed.
At the same time, maintaining safety on campus, protecting public property and preventing intimidation or violence must remain priorities for everyone involved. Allegations of damage should be investigated fairly, without assigning responsibility before the evidence establishes who was involved.
The university’s election assurance is an important step, but its effectiveness will depend on transparent implementation, clear communication and constructive engagement with students. Equally, an appeal for law and order must go hand in hand with efforts to resolve the underlying dispute. Prolonged disruption affects not only protesters and administrators but also students trying to study, use campus facilities and continue their academic lives.
A lasting settlement should therefore protect peaceful dissent while ensuring that institutional processes remain accountable and that normal campus activities can resume.
The focus must be on moving beyond competing statements towards a solution that students and the administration can trust. How can universities balance campus discipline with students’ right to representation and peaceful protest?
Also Read: Jamia Millia Islamia Agrees To Union Polls, But Students Continue Protest Over Unmet Demands
