New Delhi – In the days following the Delhi University Students Union (DUSU) elections, an unnamed member of the Congress student wing, the National Students’ Union of India (NSUI), approached Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra with a series of complaints targeting the organisation’s current leadership. The grievances focus on the conduct of Kanhaiya Kumar, the All‑India Congress Committee’s (AICC) in‑charge of NSUI, and on the handling of candidate selection, campaign management and overall ground‑level mobilisation during the university polls.
Key complaints over candidate selection and campaign management
The NSUI activist, who requested anonymity, told ThePrint that the leadership’s approach to ticket distribution and election strategy was flawed. According to the member, Kumar was rarely present on campus and made decisions in isolation, without consulting local student leaders. “Kanhaiya wasn’t on campus, how would he know what was happening? He did not take anyone’s advice, just went and made decisions on his own,” the activist said.
The most cited example involves Deepanshu Shokeen, popularly known as the “barefoot candidate.” Shokeen, the son of a Delhi Transport Corporation bus conductor, was denied an NSUI ticket for the DUSU presidency and subsequently contested the vice‑president post as an independent. He secured 30,615 votes, winning the vice‑president seat, while the official NSUI candidate, Vir Chatrath, finished third with just 4,313 votes. The activist alleges that the party’s ticket for Chatrath had already been fixed when Shokeen expressed his desire to run for president, and that the leadership forced Shokeen to contest the vice‑president slot despite his earlier request.
An NSUI functionary, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed that the party’s ticket for Chatrath was predetermined because he is the son of a senior party leader. The functionary added that once Shokeen chose to run independently, no senior NSUI figure attempted to persuade him to re‑join the party or offered any support. “No one tried to retain him despite seeing his potential,” the source said.
Further criticism centres on the way the leadership questioned Shokeen’s financial capacity. One functionary recounted that party members repeatedly taunted Shokeen about his modest resources, noting his lack of a car and limited funds. “He doesn’t have money to splurge on an election… We supported him from the back, but this was incorrect,” the functionary said, highlighting what they perceived as an unfair attitude toward a candidate from a humble background.
Other aspirants and a pattern of losses
Shokeen was not the only aspirant to break away from NSUI over ticket disputes. Vishesh Yadav contested the joint‑secretary election as an independent after a disagreement with the party’s selection process. Yadav garnered 15,778 votes, edging out the official NSUI candidate Gopal Choudhary, who received 15,206 votes.
The activist’s complaints are set against a broader backdrop of declining NSUI performance in DUSU elections. The party moved from winning a single post in 2023 to two in 2024, one in 2025 and none in 2026. The 2026 election marked the first time since 2015 that NSUI failed to secure any of the four central‑panel positions.
Beyond the election outcomes, the activist alleges that the leadership prioritises social‑media optics over grassroots management. The complaint notes that both NSUI president Vinod Jakhar and Kanhaiya Kumar were largely absent from on‑the‑ground campaigning after tickets were handed out, leading to widespread dissatisfaction among the cadre.
Structural concerns and calls for internal reflection
The grievances extend beyond the DUSU polls. According to the same source, Jakhar has not constituted the National Organising Bodies—units meant to coordinate grassroots outreach—despite having been in office for eight months. “Regularity and involvement is really less. There is no engagement. They meet no student leaders; the national organising body hasn’t been set up too,” the activist told ThePrint.
A former student‑body president from a Delhi University college, still affiliated with NSUI, echoed similar concerns about Kumar’s lack of engagement. The former president argued that as the in‑charge of NSUI, Kumar should maintain regular contact with college‑level leaders, serving as “eyes and ears” for the party. “If utilised properly, we could have been his eyes and ears, but he never spoke to us. There is a massive leadership crisis,” the former president said.
In a now‑deleted post on X (formerly Twitter), another NSUI member wrote, “We need serious reflections over our organisation and its leadership.” The sentiment underscores a growing perception of a leadership vacuum within the student wing.
ThePrint has attempted to reach NSUI president Vinod Jakhar via WhatsApp calls and texts, as well as Kanhaiya Kumar through WhatsApp messages, for comment. The report will be updated if and when responses are received.
Overall, the complaints paint a picture of an organisation grappling with internal discord, a perceived disconnect between senior leadership and ground‑level cadres, and a series of strategic missteps that culminated in a historic electoral defeat for NSUI at Delhi University. The Gandhi family’s response, if any, may shape the future direction of the party’s student outreach and its approach to upcoming campus elections across the country.
Be First to Comment