While examinations are usually a testing experience for students, questions that come from outside the syllabus are tougher to handle. This is exactly what students of Banaras Hindu University (BHU) experienced when they sat for their first semester MA Political Science examination.

The students who appeared for the subject ‘Social and Political Thought of Ancient and Medieval India' were bombarded with confusing and out of syllabus questions that connected Indian philosophers Manu and Kautilya to current world events like the GST implementation and globalisation.

According to a report in The Indian Express, the questions were allotted 15 marks in the 70 mark examination. And to get these 15 marks, the students were asked to write about either the 'Nature of GST in Kautilya Arthshashtra' or 'Manu is the first Indian Thinker of Globalisation.'

While students within the university campus had been taught about the topics and had taken down notes, those from affiliated colleges have been left clueless. “These ridiculous and unpalatable questions in our paper are really disheartening. We are being taught these fictitious concepts just to validate the policies of the present government,” a student was quoted saying in the report. Another student said that they cannot question their teachers as they would be targeted during the rest of the course.

However, Professor Kaushal Kishore Mishra, who set the question paper thoroughly defended his decision. “It was my idea to introduce these examples to students. So what if these are not in the textbook? Isn’t it our job to find newer ways to teach?” he said. According to him, he was only trying to link the thoughts of ancient Indian philosophers to present events.

As per Mishra, Kautilya’s Arthashastra is the first Indian book which hints at the current concept of GST by propounding national economic integration, while Manu was the first thinker to have introduced the tradition of globalisation in the world.

Mishra is also supported by Head of Department R P Singh, who came forward to defend his colleague by saying that the questions were not out of syllabus.