What Counts as a Grievance
A document dispute
A document was rejected or flagged, and the student believes it’s actually valid.
An allocation dispute
A student believes their allotment doesn’t match the rules that were supposed to apply, a rank, a category, or a reservation calculation.
An institution-level issue
Something went wrong specifically at reporting, a mismatch, a payment that didn’t register correctly.
A technical issue
The dashboard showed something incorrect, or a deadline notification didn’t arrive as it should have.
How It Gets Routed
A grievance isn’t dropped into one general queue for someone to eventually sort through. It’s categorised by what it’s actually about at the moment it’s filed, and sent straight to whoever is positioned to actually resolve that specific kind of issue.If It Isn’t Resolved
1
First-line review
The relevant reviewer looks at the specific dispute and responds within a set window.
2
Senior review, if the student isn't satisfied
If the first response doesn’t resolve it, or the student disputes the outcome, it moves to a senior reviewer with more context and more authority to act.
3
The authority's grievance officer, as the final internal step
DPDP already requires every data fiduciary to have a designated grievance officer for data-related complaints. That same role, or an equivalent one for admission-specific disputes, is the final point of escalation before anything would need to go outside the system entirely.