The 73rd meeting of the Board of Governors (BoG) of the National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER), scheduled for September 20, 2018, could have marked a turning point in institutional accountability—had it not been obstructed by those in power. As the Director of the Institute at the time, I submitted a Confidential Agenda Item concerning serious misconduct by two officials. But the attempt to bring it before the Board met with silent complicity and active suppression.
The agenda item—marked “Confidential” and placed as a Table Item—was submitted by NIPER norms, requiring the Chairman’s approval to be formally discussed. However, I knew that if it was routed through Dr. V.M. Katoch, then Chairman of the BoG, it would likely be blocked. To avoid this, I sent it directly to all Board members. Yet, as expected, Dr. Katoch disallowed its distribution.
The agenda item in question (73.A1) related to a formal complaint lodged by Mr. Sher Singh, a security guard at the Institute. On July 23, 2018, he reported a disturbing incident involving Mr. PJP Singh Waraich—then under suspension—who, allegedly in an inebriated state, abused, threatened, and intimidated him at the institute’s main gate around 11:20 PM on July 21.
Mr. Sher Singh’s complaint was corroborated by written statements from three witnesses: Mr. Harmesh Singh (Security Supervisor), Mr. Balkar Singh (Security Guard), and Mr. Basant Kumar (Driver). These statements were recorded by the Security In-Charge, Mr. Vikram Singh.
What followed next exposed a deeply troubling nexus within the institution.
NIPER Mohali’s main entrance was equipped with four CCTV cameras, overseen by the Computer Centre, which was headed by Mr. Rajwinder Singh. Just days earlier, on July 11, Mr. Rajwinder Singh had assured via email that all main gate cameras were functioning properly in preparation for a CISF visit scheduled for July 12.
However, when Dr. Prabha Garg, the Officiating Registrar, requested CCTV footage of the July 21 incident (via email dated July 25), Mr. Rajwinder Singh replied that no footage was available—allegedly because the recording devices had been replaced, and no backup existed.
This excuse fell apart under scrutiny. The abrupt replacement of recording equipment without prior approval and the refusal to provide even backup data, pointed to willful destruction of evidence. Moreover, Mr. Rajwinder Singh’s decision to share administrator login credentials across multiple email addresses constituted a grave breach of data security.
The relationship between Mr. Waraich and Mr. Rajwinder Singh, both from Kurukshetra, became increasingly suspect. Post Mr. Waraich’s termination, digital records and emails confirmed a clear pattern of collusion between the two. Yet, no action was taken against either of them.
Instead, the system appeared to shield them. Despite clear evidence and my repeated requests for disciplinary action, no showcause notices, chargesheets, or inquiries were issued. The very same Rajwinder Singh, despite serious lapses in duty, continued to receive institutional support. Efforts to promote him were made with unusual enthusiasm.
The institutional silence was deafening. Board members, including respected figures such as Dr. Anil Gupta from IIM Ahmedabad, witnessed these revelations without comment.
Mr. Waraich, a suspended official, was not only present unlawfully on campus but was under the protection of senior figures like Dr. Katoch and Mr. Rajneesh Tingal. The danger he posed—especially in an inebriated state—was not hypothetical. The lives of staff, students, and security personnel were at risk.
And yet, the system turned a blind eye.
This is not merely a case of internal misconduct—it is a systemic failure. The misuse of administrative power, destruction of evidence, and protection of errant officials strike at the core of institutional credibility. The leadership’s refusal to even allow the agenda item to be discussed reflects a dangerous culture of unaccountability and cronyism.
I stood alone in trying to bring this to light. My efforts to safeguard institutional integrity were not just ignored—they were actively stifled.
It is time the truth is known.
