The English Press Club (EPC) sat down with Aryan Khorana, General Secretary (Gen-Sec) of the Union Council (UC), to discuss his perspective on the recent allegations made against him by the Department of Sponsorship and Marketing (Sponz) and the Corroborations and Review Committee (CRC).
The interview began with questions about the allegations raised by Sponz. Khorana described these claims as ‘baseless’ and argued that Sponz had unfairly blamed him and the entire UC. To support his stance, Khorana referenced a clause from the Oasis Charter, which stated that for a motion to be approved and added to the charter, it required the necessary votes from both the UC and the Oasis Review Committee (ORC). He explained that the motion raised by Sponz during the Oasis Review Meet (ORM) failed to meet the required criteria from either body.
Khorana pointed out that Sponz had omitted this detail in their allegations. He also dismissed claims that he had lobbied for ORC votes as unfounded. He argued that if he were inclined to lobby, he would also have done so for the motions he had raised himself, several of which were also rejected.
Khorana clarified that neither him nor the UC held any personal grievance against Sponz members. He highlighted how he and the UC had actively participated in the festival, engaging at the ground level to make informed decisions. According to him, the UC had chosen to act independently and without bias. Khorana found it surprising that people assumed he had voted against Sponz, asserting that he had voted in their favour.[1]
He urged Sponz to reflect on why the ORC had also voted against their motion, rather than singling out the UC for political reasons. He stressed that a former major department like Sponz must identify its shortcomings and work to improve them. Furthermore, he expressed his willingness to assist the department in addressing these issues.
When questioned about inventory management during Oasis, Khorana provided insights into the UC’s responsibilities. He explained that the UC oversaw inventory tracking, recording what was received and what remained after the festival. The inventory was divided into two categories: consumables, such as sketch pens, and reusables like locks. UC members were responsible for physically verifying inventory distribution and ensuring its return post-fest.
Khorana acknowledged that issues with inventory management had emerged after the pandemic. A lack of proper knowledge transfer left coordinators unaware of the total inventory or its location. He noted that inventory maintenance, though mandated by the charter, had been neglected for nearly a decade and was only resumed during his tenure.
The Gen-Sec admitted that the knowledge transfer gap had hampered their work but emphasised that his team had documented these challenges to improve future work. He cited discussions with former Gen-Sec Abhinav Lamba about implementing a digitised inventory management system as a solution. Khorana assured that this initiative would be introduced in time for the next fest, APOGEE. The system, while requiring manual inputs of data by the UC, would significantly enhance inventory accuracy.
Khorana also addressed financial allegations, denying claims of a Rs. 50 lakh loss and a Rs. 550 charge, calling them misinformation. He clarified that neither the CRC nor the StuCCAn Finance, Ahan Bansal had approved such figures. He revealed an incident involving an Rs. 75,000 theft of gaming club inventory during the fest, which he had immediately resolved by fining the culprits. He asserted that had there been a significant loss due to inventory mismanagement, an issue would’ve been raised by the CRC during the ORM.
In conclusion, Khorana described Oasis as a legacy and emphasised that cooperation could resolve any issue. He expressed openness to future collaborations to ensure the festival’s continued success.
[1]- The EPC cannot verify this claim as voting is completely anonymous