NEW DELHI: In the 1990s, Kumar Ram Krishna spent years learning to read and write Dhundhari, a language that originated in Rajasthan and only a handful of people can read. He used it to trace trade practices and the emergence of Jaipur, and was awarded a PhD in 2006.Last year, Krishna, who now teaches at Delhi University’s College of Vocational Studies, stumbled upon what he believes were his primary data and research findings appearing in another scholar’s work.His discovery and a subsequent complaint triggered aplagiarism probe into another DU faculty member’s doctorate, awarded in 2014 under the same supervisor in the department of history.Teacher denies plagiarising work, alleges harassmentIt also raised questions about the scrutiny of older theses stored in the university library. Most exist only in physical form since digitisation is lagging.Krishna has now written to DU vice-chancellor Yogesh Singh, urging him to take action. Taking cognisance of the matter, the department of history constituted a departmental academic integrity panel, in line with UGC guidelines, and sought records from the dean of social sciences and the university librarian.The teacher accused of plagiarising Krishna’s work denied the allegations and said the matter was being examined by a university committee. “As far as the merits of the allegations are concerned, I strongly refute all accusations of plagiarism levelled against my work,” the teacher said, alleging “intimidation and mental harassment” by the complainant for over a year.Krishna’s thesis, titled “Internal Trade System in Eastern Rajasthan(1720–1780)”, was awarded in 2006 after years of fieldwork in Rajasthan’s Dhundhar region, where he read historical manuscripts written in Dhundhari, Krishna said.According to the complaint, the other scholar’s thesis, titled “Money, Markets, and Merchants: Economy and Society in Pre-Colonial Jaipur Kingdom”, is digitised and available online.“According to the similarity report generated by Turnitin, the plagiarism detection software officially used by the University of Delhi, around 38% of the textual content of my PhD thesis appears in the second thesis… excluding footnotes and appendices, and without any reference or citation to my PhD thesis,” the complaint states.The complaint, first submitted in April 2025, was addressed to the university librarian, the chairman of the research council, the head of the department of history and the UGC.The complainant further argued that his thesis was submitted before digitisation and mandatory online repositories became the norm. “Consequently, my PhD thesis is not available online to date,” the complaint states.“The absence of an online record appears to have enabled (the other teacher) to reproduce substantial portions of my thesis without detection through plagiarism detection software available at that time. The hard copy of my PhD thesis was available in the university library, the department of history library, and with our common supervisor,” the complaint adds.TOI reached out to Shalini Shah, then head of the department of history, who chaired the committee; current HoD Anirudh Deshpande and supervisor R P Rana, but received no response.University librarian Rajesh Singh said the matter was forwarded to the department after it was brought to their notice. Krishna claimed he had repeatedly sought information on the findings of the inquiry committee but had not received any response.Asked how many research works remain undigitised, Singh said: “The university started receiving soft copies of research work from 2015-16 onwards. All theses submitted thereafter are digitised and uploaded to relevant online platforms. Research produced before 2015-16 has not been digitised so far.”“Non-digitisation of old research leaves it at the risk of being copied and raises questions on the academic integrity and quality of research produced at the university, as well as being unjust to scholars who produced research before anti-plagiarism norms came into place,” Krishna told TOI .The degree under scrutiny was awarded in 2014, and UGC’s anti-plagiarism regulations came into force in 2018. As per regulations, in cases of 10% to 40% similarity, the scholar will be asked to submit a revised script within six months. In case the similarity is more than 60%, a scholar’s registration can be cancelled.
