Caste-based power dynamics continue to afflict educational institutions across the country, with yet another prominent case emerging.
On August 10, the Students’ Association of the Film and Television Institute of India (FTII), Pune, issued an open letter accusing the institution of mishandling a complaint of caste discrimination.
The complaint, filed by Prashant More, a student from the TV Direction batch of 2021, alleges caste-based harassment by Dr Milind Damle, Associate Professor of ETV Production and Head of the TV Direction Department.
Despite these serious accusations, Dr Damle was eventually cleared of any wrongdoing. However, multiple testimonies from within the institute suggest a concerning pattern of discrimination and bias within a structure already entrenched in caste-based prejudices.
Recollecting the incident
Prashant recounts that the incidents began from the very first day of orientation, when Prof Damle frequently questioned his choice of “caste” as subjects for various assignments.
“Initially, his questions didn’t seem odd, and I explained that my topics were informed by my lived experience as a Dalit. But gradually, things escalated, and he harassed me at almost every step,” Prashant recalls.
The harassment allegedly extended from denying Prashant access to locations to passing comments about Ambedkar. Prashant claims that the professor’s attitude grew more malicious over time, with Prof Damle reportedly asking other students to not work with him, thereby, isolating him further.
A member of the Ambedkar Periyar Phule Study Circle (APPSC) at the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT) Bombay, on the condition of anonymity, remarks, “These are textbook examples of caste discrimination — excluding those who challenge the status quo. It’s a modern form of casteism. The reason why the professor got so agitated about the students choice of topic is because it is uncomfortable for him. People like him see caste as a threat to their privilege. For them, there’s nothing wrong with the caste system, so when it’s questioned, they refuse to confront it.”
Other complaints
The allegations against Dr Damle do not stop with Prashant’s complaint.
The entire 2021 batch has also lodged a complaint against the professor, accusing him of harassment and inappropriate behaviour. Students from the batch report that the professor consistently sought to assert his authority in an overbearing manner.
“He would publicly reprimand students for minor grammatical errors or criticise them for Instagram posts that were none of his concern. This was a deliberate method of power play that he frequently employed against his students,” a student from the TV Direction batch of 2021 said, speaking on condition of anonymity. They also note that Prashant was his target right from the beginning.
In their open letter, the students’ association of FTII notes, “...though there were issues of caste discrimination within the institute in the past, this is the first time a student had gathered courage to raise his voice against it.”
The letter demands a reinvestigation of the complaint through a more transparent mechanism. The handling of this case highlights broader debates around institutional casteism and the general apathy towards such incidents.
“The association's action is also quite delayed. Everyone at large I would say is apathetic towards incidents like this,” says Prashant Moore, adding, “I wanted this to be recorded at FTII. This professor is a habitual offender, and I couldn’t just walk away silently like others. That is why I lodged the complaint.”
Prashant More’s complaint, filed on December 13, 2023, accused Dr Damle of targeting him on multiple occasions due to his caste identity. However, the promised resolution within 15 days never materialised. Instead, it took six months for any report to be released.
What was the response of FTII?
In response to the complaint, FTII formed a two-member committee to investigate the matter. However, the committee’s composition and function have been heavily criticised for their lack of transparency and adherence to proper procedures. The committee, consisting of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe (SC/ST) Liaison Officer and a legal consultant, was established without Prashant’s consultation or consent.
Prashant further alleges that although the committee was labelled as a "fact-finding committee", the members produced two separate and contradictory reports. These reports were then sent to an undisclosed third party, further complicating the investigation and raising suspicions of bias.
“Why was the committee presenting analytical reports if it was only supposed to be a fact-finding body?" Prashant asks.
The member of APPSC at IIT Bombay points out that this reflects a common pattern of how caste and gender-based atrocities occur in higher education institutions.
“The power disparity between faculty and students is immense, especially in the absence of support systems like SC/ST cells or proper reservation implementation. With Savarna faculty dominating committees, most institutions either lack proper mandates or fail to implement them even when they exist. This is how we find ourselves in such situations,” says the member.
He further adds that the main function of these committees is to work for the institutes and not the students. “Their primary role is to whitewash any responsibility from the institute. This is a very common pattern so they will either try to intimidate the students or dismiss the case with a clean chit to the accused,” he says.
What does the incident point towards?
Incidents like these at IIT, FTII, or other higher education institutions cannot be viewed in isolation but must be contextualised within the broader framework of caste-based discrimination in Indian education. The concept of Brahminical supremacy, as discussed in Prof Ravikant Kisana’s article Teaching Like a Savarna, provides a critical lens through which we can analyse these situations.
Kisana argues that Indian academic institutions are deeply rooted in Brahminical traditions that privilege certain caste groups, thereby, maintaining caste hierarchies and excluding Dalit Bahujan students from equal opportunities for learning and growth.
Professor Damle’s comments on Ambedkar particularly reflect this bias.
As the APPSC member notes, “The impunity with which the Ambedkar comment is made reveals a deep-seated resentment towards the growth and educational opportunities afforded to SC/ST students. This is an expression of that resentment, enabled by the perceived safety within these institutions — something they wouldn’t dare express publicly.”
According to testimonials from Prashant and his classmate, the Ambedkar comment was made unnecessarily when Prashant requested permission to screen his work in a better auditorium. He said, “It was completely unnecessary. The original auditorium wasn't suitable for screening my film, and important details were being missed. When I requested a change, the professor remarked, ‘What, is Ambedkar not visible or something?’”
Despite the serious allegations, Prof Damle has been given a clean chit, and throughout the investigation, he has maintained his positions of authority, including as Chairperson of the Student Grievance Redressal Committee. “If he is at the helm of the Grievance Redressal Committee, where can students go to raise their concerns?” asks an FTII student.
The official word
Although calls for a reinvestigation are growing, the institution maintains that the investigation was conducted fairly and transparently.
Registrar Prateek Jain asserts, “Yes, we received a complaint from a former FTII student. The administration took it seriously and conducted an inquiry as per established procedures. The inquiry was completed in a fair and transparent manner, and action was taken based on the findings, which were communicated to all concerned.”
This perhaps highlights more concerning issues of systemic inequities that allow such incidents to be dismissed or ignored. As the APPSC member points out, “Proving caste discrimination is difficult, especially without physical violence. The testimonies of SC students are often undervalued compared to those of an upper caste faculty.”
