Students arrived this semester to find out that their ID cards didn’t work as a mode of payment at eateries on campus anymore. On the 17th of September, the President of the Students’ Union, Satyansh Rai, sent a mail announcing the re-introduction of the service, albeit under certain conditions. The English Press Club spoke to Satyansh to understand why the service was initially revoked and why and how it was brought back.

Satyansh explained that the service was revoked because of flaws in the billing process which led to the SWD having to provide ₹25 lakh on credit. Under the previous system, the eateries sent their monthly bills to the SWD, which then deducted the amount from the students’ accounts. It was possible for the eateries to make fraudulent claims. Another issue was that delays on the part of the vendors to relay bills prevented the SWD from charging some students before they graduated.

After new officials took charge of administrative positions earlier this semester, a series of proposals were made to address the previous system’s shortcomings. The first suggestion was the Expenses Review System app, built by the SU Technical Team. This would allow the food vendors to communicate in real time with students, and would thus keep a check on false bills. The ERS app notifies students as soon as they are charged, and this has been made possible because the computers at all the food outlets have been connected to the internet.

After the old system was revoked, the profits of the food vendors had fallen drastically. The Institute realised that under the previous system, the SWD’s efforts were contributing towards the profits of private food vendors. To counter this, a credit card-like system was proposed, with the SWD also getting a share of the profits. Since the Student Aid Fund is not very large, this additional revenue will go to this fund. Earlier, the food joints only paid a nominal amount (₹1500) to the Institute as rent for land, water, and electricity. Under the new system, the percentage of profits that go into the Student Aid Fund will be decided by the SWD, along with the SU. Satyansh said that the food vendors were also happy with this arrangement, since it was only a small fee when compared to the massive drop in business they faced without the ID card payment system.

Another major flaw in the previous system was that the SWD had to give out significant credit. Some students spent over half a lakh at eateries over the semester’s duration. As Satyansh explained, ‘This created a problem for the SWD because they had to release the payments for the vendors from their own pocket, since the students had not yet been charged. For that specific reason, an upper cap of  ₹12,000 per-student, per-semester was proposed.’ Satyansh went on to say that this upper cap might be changed, if and when approved by both the SU and SWD. He said that the SU will keep track of how many students have reached the ₹12,000 cap, and accordingly ask the SWD to modify it.

The figure of  ₹12,000 was arrived at simply because it is the amount that students pay as advance at the beginning of the year. Satyansh said that if a collective decision can be made to increase this advance payment, then the cap could be increased as well.

After discussing the benefits of the new system, Satyansh went on to talk about how the decision to revoke the ID card payment facility was taken without consulting the SU. ‘This was one of the concerns we raised to the Dean Administration with regard to the ID card issue – since it was a student-centric issue, [how come] neither the SSMS nor the SU were considered?’

Satyansh was hopeful that the new officials at the helm will understand the problems faced by students, and would not make such decisions without consulting the SU. If such a situation recurs, Satyansh emphasized that it is the responsibility of the incumbent student representatives—the President and General Secretary—to hold the Institute accountable, represent the students in decision making, and raise the students’ concerns.