A group of 215 Vice Chancellors, former Vice Chancellors, educationists, scientists, scholars and academic leaders from across the country has issued an open letter to Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, expressing disappointment over her reported remark describing IIT Madras Director Prof. V. Kamakoti as a “gaumutra expert,” during the Lok Sabha debate on the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Amendment Bill, 2026.
Dated 30 July 2026, the letter argues that Parliament should remain a forum where ideas are debated with dignity and intellectual rigour rather than through dismissive labels and personal caricatures.
Over 215 Vice Chancellors, former Vice Chancellors, and academics signed an open letter condemning Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra for mocking #IITMadras Director Prof. V. Kamakoti as a "gaumutra expert" during a #LokSabha debate . pic.twitter.com/06SITvMWsX
— DD News (@DDNewslive) July 30, 2026
Addressing Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, the signatories wrote:
“India’s Parliament has always been expected to be a forum where ideas are debated with rigour, disagreements are expressed with dignity, and individuals are judged by the strength of their arguments rather than by caricatures.”
Expressing concern over the reported remark, they stated, “It is in this spirit that we write to express our disappointment over your reported remark describing IIT Madras Director Professor V. Kamakoti as a ‘gaumutra expert.’ Whether intended as sarcasm or political rhetoric, such a characterization raises concerns that go far beyond one individual.”
The signatories highlighted Prof. Kamakoti’s academic credentials, describing him as the head of one of India’s foremost scientific and technological institutions. He holds M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in Computer Science and Engineering from IIT Madras, has published more than 150 research papers, participated in over 50 research and development projects, received several honours including the DRDO Academic Excellence Award and the Indian Electronics and Semiconductor Association Techno Visionary Award, and has been the guiding force behind India’s first industry-grade microprocessor.
The letter describes him as “one of the top tech brains of the country.”
The academicians stressed that every scholar has the freedom to explore ideas and participate in scientific discussions.
“Like every academic, he is entitled to present hypotheses, discuss traditional knowledge and participate in scientific conversations.”
The letter argues that reducing scholars to labels instead of engaging with their ideas undermines constitutional values.
“To dismiss a scholar through a label rather than engage with the substance of his views risks undermining the very scientific temper that our Constitution calls upon every citizen to develop.”
Explaining what scientific temper means, the signatories wrote: “Scientific temper is not merely scepticism towards unconventional ideas, it is equally the willingness to examine claims objectively before accepting or rejecting them.”
The letter also points to the evolution of scientific knowledge over time.
“History reminds us that many ideas once considered implausible eventually found scientific validation, while many widely accepted beliefs were later discarded.”
Expressing concern over the impact such remarks could have on India’s academic community, the signatories wrote:
“Our scientists, scholars and educators deserve to know that they can participate in public debate without fear of being reduced to dismissive labels.”
Calling for reasoned debate rather than personal attacks, they added: “Criticise their arguments, challenge their evidence, demand higher standards of proof, but do not diminish scholarship itself.”
The opening page of the letter also underlines the broader principles behind the appeal. It states that dismissing a scholar through labels rather than engaging with the substance of his views risks undermining the scientific temper envisaged by the Constitution.
It further says that scientists, scholars and educators should be able to participate in public debate without fear of being reduced to dismissive labels.
The signatories argue that when complex scientific questions become objects of political ridicule, society loses an opportunity for informed debate, adding that while disagreement is essential in a democracy, “mockery is not a substitute for reasoned engagement.”
The open letter has been signed by 215 Vice Chancellors, former Vice Chancellors, educationists, scientists and scholars representing universities, research institutions and academic bodies across India.
Among the prominent signatories are Dr. Rajiv Kumar, former Vice Chairman of NITI Aayog; Dr. CSR Prabhu, former Director General of NIC; Dr. S.S. Pandey, former Vice Chancellor of RRBM University; Dr. D.C. Joshi, former Vice Chancellor of Agriculture University, Kota; Dr. Pankaj Mittal, Secretary General of the Association of Indian Universities; Dr. R.D. Kulkarni, Vice Chancellor of the University of Mumbai;
Dr. Santishri Dhulipudi Pandit, Vice Chancellor of Jawaharlal Nehru University; Dr. Prakash Babu, Vice Chancellor of Pondicherry University; Dr. Ravichandiran V., Vice Chancellor of Delhi Pharmaceutical Science and Research University; Dr. T.G. Sitharam, former Director of IIT Guwahati and former Chairman of AICTE; Dr. Anil Sahasrabudhe, former Chairman of AICTE and NAAC;
Dr. D.P. Agarwal, former Chairman of UPSC; Dr. Sushma Shekhar Kulkarni, Vice Chancellor of NICMAR University; and several serving and former Vice Chancellors, directors and heads of higher educational institutions from across the country.
