Note: This article is based on a survey conducted prior to the recent changes introduced in the mess system. The findings and opinions reflected here represent student sentiment before these reforms were implemented. Consequently, some of the concerns and criticisms outlined may have been addressed by the subsequent changes, and current student experiences may differ from those captured in this survey.

In order to gauge the opinion of BITSians on campus about the messes and their various aspects, the English Press Club conducted a survey that aimed to understand students’ concerns and explore possible solutions to problems within the messes. Responses were elicited from all undergraduate students and nearly all bhawans. A majority of the responses came from the SV, KG, RB, and VK-B messes.

Amongst the respondents, over 60% indicated that they consumed two meals a day at the mess, while around 21% consumed all three meals, and 16% consumed only one, with the remaining 3% abstaining entirely. A supermajority of nearly three-quarters of respondents admitted to skipping mess meals at least thrice a week, with only a paltry 3% of respondents asserting that they never did so, a percentage that corresponded with those who rarely or never ate at eateries, which all other students did at least once a week, and nearly 50% did almost daily or daily. Of the students who skipped meals at the mess, nearly nine-tenths of respondents indicated that they did so due to issues with the taste. Half of the students expressed that the limited timings were also an issue, and a third indicated that they simply preferred eateries over the mess. Around 10% of students skipped meals for ‘dieting’, and many respondents expressed their distaste for the monotony and quality of the mess food. This disdain was most expressed towards dinner, which barely 5% of respondents rated as good quality. Breakfast was viewed far more positively, with nearly three-fourths of respondents admitting it was good quality. Lunch, however, was liked by only a little over 20%. In general, on a scale of 1 to 5, mess food was rated ‘2’ by a plurality of respondents (around 43%), and ‘1’ by around 23%. Not a single respondent rated it 5, and only a tiny minority of 6% rated it at 4.

A similar trend was noticed with the level of satisfaction regarding the taste and freshness of food, with 51% of participants being ‘dissatisfied’ and no participant opting for the ‘very satisfied’ option. The hygiene and cleanliness of the messes received a more favourable response, with more than two-thirds of respondents rating it as ‘Good’ or ‘Average’. 

The monotony of the menu also emerged as a recurrent complaint. A clear majority of students found the offerings repetitive, with several respondents remarking that the same few items rotated endlessly under different names, often with a gravy that remained identical. This repetitiveness, combined with uneven quality, appeared to drive much of the apathy toward regular mess meals. When asked which aspect of the mess experience they found most lacking, 95% of students cited ‘taste’, followed closely by 89% who were dissatisfied with the ‘variety’. On the question of regional variety, an overwhelming 70% marked it as ‘very important’ or ‘somewhat important’. Suggestions for improvement in this regard demanded more South Indian, Chinese, and Continental options. In identifying specific meal components needing improvement, ‘main course’ dominated responses by a wide margin, followed by snacks, beverages, and desserts. Health consciousness was another theme. Around three-fourths of students indicated a preference for more low-oil, high-protein, orfitness-oriented options and a recurring complaint among the respondents was that the mess food was too ‘oily’.

A notable portion of respondents claimed to be unaware of any formal feedback mechanism in place, while a majority of 60% described existing channels as ‘poorly’ managed. Many suggestions reflected a desire for more accountability and responsiveness to feedback. Perceptions about mess fees were similarly low. A large majority deemed the food ‘slightly overpriced’ or ‘overpriced,’ with only a handful considering the fees justified by the quality. Subsequently, there was near-unanimity on one idea: over 90% of students supported a pay-per-meal system, where charges would apply only for meals consumed rather than the blanket subscription model currently in place.

Notable suggestions in the responses included a desire for more and more frequent non-vegetarian food options in the mess menu, an increase in timings of the mess for breakfast and lunch, consistency and clarity across messes and on the SSMS website about whether certain items(such as fruit or dessert) are limited or not, and the quantity that is given per person. Many also expressed frustration with the limitations on fruit during breakfast. The responses to the survey made it evident that most students are, to various extents, dissatisfied and frustrated with the mess. The English Press Club hopes that these concerns are addressed by the relevant authorities as soon as possible.