Recently, Agriculture Minister Shivraj Singh Chauhan had made a clear statement, indicating that the government has no immediate plan for GM seeds (although GM seeds of GM seeds and mustard of GM seeds already available to Indian farmers) in Indian agriculture. No new GM seed will be introduced for now.

If we compare this stance with recommendations in the Niti Aig paper, a contradiction becomes clear: the paper indicates the benefit of GM crops to American farmers through duty-free access, while Indian farmers are still banned from using such seeds.

It is important to note that the document in the question is a working paper, not the official policy document. For example, its content does not represent formal government policy. However, the paper provides insight into thinking within the policy of the policy and, possibly, the direction of internal ideas within the government. The dispute highlights the complex and often conflicting pressures that shape India’s agricultural policy in front of global trade challenges.

This is the question in the heart of protest: Why is JNU entrance exam so important? Why students and faculties say here that it should be retained:

Why JNU’s PHD in entrance exam cases

1. Lack number system: The unique model of JNU provides additional weightage to backward sectors and women candidates. This positive action helps to level the playground and is seen as necessary to ensure social justice in entry

2. In-house entrance exam: Traditionally, JNU conducted its examination, which is ready to assess students in line with the separate educational culture of the university. This enabled comprehensive evaluation beyond multi-intellectual testing, adjusting diverse intellectual backgrounds.

3. Commitment to social inclusion: JNU’s entry policies have long reflected their commitment to equity, which takes shape through years of student activism. Centralized examinations like NET (National Entrance Test), critics argue, bend the balance in favor of people with expensive coaching and resources.

Protest timelines and charges

In an open letter on 26 June, JNUSU President Nitish Kumar, Vice President Manisha, and General Secretary Mutteha Fatima accused the administration of sacrificing the promise made during the 17-day hunger strike in August 2023-2025-26 to restore JNUEE from the academic session. He alleged that the administration is using “lack of funds” on the pretext of stalling the entrance examination, carrying forward the model benefiting the ideological colleagues of RSS and ABVP.

Vice Chancellor Pandit, in his response on 27 June, claimed that he had asked all Dean to take responsibility for taking the entrance exam last year, but no one offered written commitment. He said that many chose for UGC-Net and QET, instead, citing widespread access and high participation from reserved categories. “As the democratic head of the institution,” he said, “I should respect his collective decision.”

Faculty stands with students

Rejecting VC’s arguments, Januta called the decision out of exclusion and poor plan.

In a letter issued on June 30, it was reported that the net results of June 2025 will not be declared on time for the upcoming academic cycle, effectively stopping the candidates who completed their master’s degree by applying this year.

JNUTA demanded a comprehensive meeting with university officials, including representatives of teachers, to discuss what it is called “fragmented and exclusion” entry policy. He also criticized the VC’s request, including the joint-religion-sure Vaibhav Meena-Ek JNUSU member, which supports the CUET/NET model and has not participated in the strike-to reflect the collective stand of the Sangh in the discussion. In particular, the JNU administration has postponed the meeting of stakeholders.