Allegations of Fake Documents Surface in Rohilkhand University NAAC Rating A++ Case

Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh: Serious questions have emerged over the A++ grade awarded to Mahatma Jyotiba Phule Rohilkhand University after allegations surfaced claiming that the institution may have submitted forged or misleading information during its accreditation process.

A formal complaint has been filed challenging the university’s assessment under the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC), triggering demands for a review of its highest-grade rating.

Complaint Flags Discrepancies in Academic Data Submission

The controversy began after Jitendra Patel submitted a complaint to the Director of the National Assessment and Accreditation Council, seeking a reassessment of the university’s accreditation status.

The complaint alleges that the university’s Self Study Report (SSR), submitted on December 21, 2022, contained inflated and inconsistent academic data that may have influenced the final A++ grading.

One of the key concerns raised is the discrepancy in the number of academic programmes. While the SSR reportedly lists 85 courses, official records are said to confirm only 77, with several programmes allegedly non-existent or incorrectly documented.

The complaint argues that such inconsistencies raise serious doubts about the accuracy of institutional data used in the accreditation evaluation.

Allegations Over Unapproved and Inactive Courses

The complaint further claims that several academic programmes were misrepresented in the accreditation documents. These include integrated postgraduate and PhD courses in engineering that allegedly lack approval from the All India Council for Technical Education.

It also states that MPhil programmes, which have reportedly been inactive for years, were incorrectly shown as ongoing in the report submitted for evaluation.

Additional concerns have been raised regarding advanced academic qualifications such as DSc, D Litt, and LLD programmes, which the complaint claims are not operational or formally approved under relevant state university regulations.

The complaint also highlights alleged inclusion of multiple diploma and certificate programmes without proper regulatory clearance.

Faculty Strength and Academic Compliance Questioned

Another major allegation concerns the teacher-student ratio. The complainant claims the university did not meet the faculty requirements prescribed by the University Grants Commission, potentially affecting key performance indicators used in NAAC grading.

According to the complaint, discrepancies between required and actual faculty strength may have contributed to an inaccurate representation of academic quality during evaluation.

University Rejects All Allegations

The university administration has strongly denied the accusations, stating that NAAC accreditation is conducted by independent expert committees and not influenced by internal institutional claims alone.

University spokesperson Dr. Vinay Verma stated that the evaluation process is transparent and externally monitored, adding that the allegations are “baseless and misleading.”

Accreditation Process Under Spotlight

The dispute has sparked wider debate within academic circles over the reliability of accreditation systems in higher education, which depend heavily on institutional self-reported data.

Education experts argue that stronger verification mechanisms may be needed to ensure that institutional claims match ground realities, particularly when such ratings influence academic reputation and funding opportunities.

The complaint is currently under review by NAAC authorities. If the allegations are substantiated, it could prompt a broader reassessment of accreditation verification procedures across Indian universities.