Allegations and counter-allegations of corruption. A management tussle. And a courtroom battle. A mess has been brewing at the Gandhi Smriti and Darshan Samiti – an institute under the Union culture ministry dedicated to preserving Mahatma Gandhi’s legacy.
The turning point seems to be a rift between Vijay Goel, a former Union minister who has been the vice-chairman of GSDS and the chairperson of its executive committee since 2021, and Jwala Prasad, a Delhi University professor who was removed as the institute’s director on February 21.
Goel has accused Prasad of administrative negligence, financial irregularities, and personal misconduct. Prasad, in turn, has alleged that Goel misused institutional resources for personal work, bypassed norms in taking decisions and awarding contracts, and created a hostile environment. He also claimed that he was removed because he raised concerns about Goel’s tenure.
Prasad was removed after Goel wrote to the Delhi University and the Union culture ministry backed the decision. The culture ministry subsequently appointed ministry director Pallavi Prashant Holkar as interim director of GSDS. But Prasad challenged his removal and the new appointment in the Delhi High Court, which issued notices to the GSDS, the culture ministry, Goel, DU, and Holkar on March 4. The court has refused to stay any decision and will next hear the matter on July 3.
Located at Rajghat, the Gandhi Smriti and Darshan Samiti is an autonomous body formed in September 1984 by the merger of Gandhi Darshan at Rajghat and Gandhi Smriti. The Samiti has 20 members, including the prime minister who is the chairman. As per the Samiti’s memorandum of association, it is the executive committee which manages the affairs of the GSDS. The vice-chairman of the Samiti will be the chairperson of the executive committee and this whole panel will be nominated by the Samiti chairman, or the prime minister. While the director is not part of the executive committee, he or she is the principal executive officer of the Samiti working under the chairman or vice-chairman.
The rift comes in the backdrop of certain activities pointing to a departure from Gandhi’s principles and the stamp of political influence over institutional communication in recent years.
Meanwhile, employees and members remain hesitant to comment on the latest controversy, with one senior staffer remarking that “this is a fight between two big people”.
Allegation vs allegation and DU action
On May 3, 2024, Goel wrote to Prasad with several accusations, including non-proper discharge of administrative duties, failure to implement biometric attendance consistently, allowing an employee to live in the director’s house against rules, suspected alcoholism of an employee, unauthorised expenditures without budget allocation, and permitting a family to stay in the VVIP guest house for a month. They also included appointments without notifying the vice-president, potential misuse of the director's residence repair budget, unauthorised renovation work, and potential financial irregularities in institutional spending.
“You are not properly discharging your rights and duties in administrative work in Gandhi Smriti and Darshan Samiti, this is my second letter for that,” Goel wrote. The letter also referenced a file mentioned in a “previous letter” but Newslaundry could not check the contents of previous correspondence.
Prasad responded to the letter on May 15.
On the question of biometric attendance, he claimed, “All employees/officers mark their attendance through biometrics. The biometric machine had malfunctioned due to the floods in the past. Now it has been repaired again. Earlier, the attendance of no director was marked, but after your order, my attendance is also marked in the register, which you also inspected.”
On the question of an employee living in the director’s house against rules and facing a complaint of alcoholism, Prasad wrote, “The said employee was living in the director’s house for the last six years. However, now he has been given a house to live in another place. No complaint about him drinking alcohol has come to my office yet. If any such complaint comes, action will definitely be taken on it. You also inspect and visit Gandhi Darshan from time to time but such a thing has never come to your notice.”
On the question of unauthorised renovation work at the director’s residence, Prasad wrote, “The director’s residence was in a very bad condition after the flood. The goods kept in it were getting damaged by termites. After getting it repaired and getting the estimated budget approved, work is being done through the CPWD. So that the goods do not get damaged. Verbal consent was also obtained from you.”
On permitting a family to stay in the VVIP guest house for a month, Prasad wrote, “Receiving such a letter instead of encouraging the work done by me is discouraging. There are many such examples where the dignity of the post of director was affected, which does not send a good message…I used to be the main speaker in all the programmes…but you removed the name of the director everywhere. There are many such facts which make it seem that this letter has been given to me with some wrong intention or malice.”
The first letter seeking his removal came on February 10 this year. Goel wrote to the DU vice-chancellor saying that Prasad should be sent back to his original post with immediate effect. Two days later, the university’s registrar wrote to Prasad saying that he had failed to report to the registrar’s office with immediate effect.
The same day, Prasad wrote to the university’s joint registrar saying that only the Central government can remove someone from the post of GSDS director and he had received no such order. He subsequently approached the culture ministry.
However, on February 21, Amita Prasad Sarabhai, joint secretary of the ministry, wrote a similar letter to Prasad, saying he has to be removed from the post. Prasad wrote to the ministry the next day, saying that this order be reconsidered.
Prasad’s complaint to the ministry
In his letter to the ministry, Prasad claimed he was arbitrarily removed only because had raised financial and administrative concerns linked to Goel’s tenure. Among his claims, he alleged Goel pressured him to approve non-compliant legal bills, deployed GSDS staff for personal work, and unlawfully spent institutional funds on advertisements and contracts.
Prasad claimed he was pressured to clear bills amounting to Rs 14.3 lakh for two hearings on August 30 and September 18 last year when senior advocate Pinky Anand represented the institute in a matter. Anand, the former additional solicitor general, once led the BJP’s legal team and was the party spokesperson. Prasad claimed Anand had been appointed by Goel to give her undue benefits while bypassing the decision of the executive council. He claimed the bills were not in compliance with the allowable charges as per the executive committee decision and office memorandum.
In his complaint, a copy of which has also been attached in his court petition, Prasad claimed 10 GSDC staffers were deployed for Goel’s personal work. He also claimed Rs 75 lakh was spent on ads and the canteen contract awarded without following procedure to benefit certain entities. He also alleged that he was pressured to award a contract to a private firm instead of CPWD. Goel violated NGT orders to relocate trees to GSDS premises from his under-construction property at DDU Marg, Prasad alleged.
Prasad also claimed that other directors had quit during Goel’s tenure due to repeated insults.
However, in an order issued by undersecretary B Asha Nair on February 28, the ministry upheld the decision to remove Prasad and to temporarily replace him with Pallavi Prashant Holkar until a regular director is appointed.
Newslaundry could not ascertain the veracity of Prasad’s claims. We reached out to Pinky Anand for comment. This report will be updated if a response is received.
Savarkar special edition, UCC lecture
This tussle comes in the wake of certain activities pointing to a departure from Gandhi’s principles at the GSDS in recent years. Whether they are lectures promoting controversial political agendas such as the Uniform Civil Code or collaborative events with RSS-affiliated outfits.
The X handle of the institute also seems to be focussing more on the promotion of the Narendra Modi government instead of Gandhiji’s thoughts. Between March 1 and March 25, 13 tweets by Narendra Modi were reposted by its X handle while 10 tweets on Gandhi went up. A cutout of Prime Minister Narendra Modi is being installed in place of Mahatma Gandhi at the entrance of Gandhi Darshan – a museum spread over 36 acres of land.
Since Goel took over as vice-president of the executive committee, the monthly edition of the GSDS magazine, called Antim Jan, has been frequently featuring PM Narendra Modi’s Mann Ki Baat. In 2022, the magazine carried a special edition on V D Savarkar, hailing his role in the freedom struggle.
In July 2023, it organised a lecture on the Uniform Civil Code addressed by then Kerala governor Arif Mohammad Khan. On February 26 this year, the GSDS and RSS affiliate Pragya Pravah organised an event to mark Mahashivratri called ‘Shivoham – Jagruti Kaal’.
Goel and Prasad did not respond to repeated requests for comment. Newslaundry sent a questionnaire to them. This report will be updated if they respond.
Newslaundry also sent a questionnaire to culture ministry undersecretary B Asha Nair, and Holkar. This report will be updated if they respond.
In times of misinformation, you need news you can trust. We’ve got you covered. Subscribe to Newslaundry and power our work.
Newslaundry is a reader-supported, ad-free, independent news outlet based out of New Delhi. Support their journalism, here.
