Protest Enters Thirteenth Day, University Says Matter Resolved, Supporters Remain Outside

On Tuesday, 9th September 2025, the thirteenth day of the protest, at 12:25 pm, the Dean of Student Affairs (DSA) Professor Dheeraj Sanghi, sent out an email to the student body. He stated that the university, following “a series of constructive conversations led by WGWC representatives, [consider] the [protest] as resolved.” The email stated that claims of withheld salaries and coercion were circulated as  “disruption and misinformation” and asserted that “a majority of the workers have joined work willingly.”

The DSA  noted that the negotiation process “could have been achieved earlier if the process was not derailed by involvement of multiple parties including the Student Government and those influencing the process from outside the institution.” 

UG Council member Tanisha Iyer (UG ‘26), speaking to The Edict said, "This is a call from the workers, and any involvement from the student government is just an involvement in terms of solidarity. The involvement that people have in this protest is personal, it is not something the student government is instigating or leading. That goes for students and faculty as well. Everything that has been decided and is being called for is through the workers."

Starting Monday, 8th September, housekeeping staff had resumed their shifts within campus but continued the protest in cycles, with staff sitting at the protest site at the end of their daily shift. Members of the administration claimed that withheld salaries from the previous month would be deposited on 10th September, which Sanghi reiterated in the email.  

Workers were also asked to sign an “apology” document by the administration at a closed-door meeting. The document framed the protest as a violation of university rules and required an official apology for protesting. It further stated that any future protests would require a 14-day notice. The meeting was attended by Assistant Registrar Sachin Gehlot and Director of Admin Pooja Manaktala. According to several protesters, they were denied time to deliberate before signing. “We asked for 10 minutes to discuss, but they refused to let us leave,” one worker said. 

Following the meeting, protesting workers were asked to take down the protest site infrastructure later in the afternoon, including bamboo supports and seating. This spurred discussions among students and workers towards sustaining the demonstration once housekeeping staff return to duty. A common sentiment emphasised unity, with concerned stakeholders noting that “we may have fallen behind, but if we continue to fight, we can still win. This fight is about the workers.” 

Later in the afternoon, journalists and videographers from The Wire documented workers, students, and faculty speaking about their demands and the day’s developments, as well as the intent and motive behind the protest, from its history in Ashokan life, as well as its ramifications in a broader socio-economic sense. 

By evening, the focus shifted to the town hall held by the Ashoka University Student Government (AUSG). After summarising important details from the protests, the floor was then opened to questions from the student body. One of the most pressing concerns amongst students was the reinstatement of the three dismissed women workers. With no clarity on their job security, students questioned whether the funds collected from solidarity campaigns would be used to support them. 

Expanding on fund allocation and usage, Iyer responded that much of the money had gone into financing the protest’s daily expenses, such as food, mattresses and tents. However, the remaining funds are being consolidated to estimate whether further distribution of funds amongst workers is possible.

As workers prepare to resume work, students raised queries regarding how this would impact the momentum of the protest. In response, Iyer emphasised the necessity of student solidarity in keeping up momentum. While some students suggested holding protests inside the campus, the AUSG  noted that this might disincentivise students who are skeptical of the updated residence life policies from participating and demonstrations on campus can put students in jeopardy. Earlier in the day, suggestions put forth in front of the workers included maintaining a symbolic sit-in before or after shifts. 

Several students present at the open meeting raised questions regarding transparency within the movement. Concerns brought up regarding closed SG meetings and the absence of a broader protest committee were met with the promise of setting up efficient communication channels. As the evening closed, there was an added emphasis that the return of workers to duty did not signal the end of the movement. 

(Edited by Somansh Sarangi and Fatema Tambawalla)