Galgotias University has clarified that Professor Neha Singh, who faced criticism for presenting a Chinese-made robotic dog as the university’s innovation, has not been suspended following the controversy over its display at the India AI Impact Summit. The university stated that she has been directed to continue with the institution while an internal inquiry examines how the incident occurred.

The clarification comes after widespread criticism over a robotic dog showcased at the summit. The model, presented at the university’s stall and referred to as “Orion”, was described as an innovation linked to the university’s Centre of Excellence. However, observers identified it as a commercially available Unitree Go2 developed by China-based Unitree Robotics, rather than an in-house creation.

Registrar Nitin Kumar Gaur said the university has already submitted its explanation to the authorities concerned and acknowledged lapses in how the exhibit was presented. Speaking to ANI, he stated that the institution vacated its stall at the expo following the backlash and apologised for any embarrassment caused.
 

“It was a mistake,” Gaur said, adding that there was no intention to mislead. He emphasised that the university does not wish to damage either its own reputation or that of the country, and that steps would be taken to prevent such incidents in future.

Addressing speculation about Professor Singh’s professional status, Gaur categorically denied reports of suspension. He said she has been asked to remain with the university as the review process continues. While disciplinary procedures will be followed if required, he stressed that the actions of one individual should not be seen as representative of the entire institution.

“They are also citizens of India, and we all want our country to move forward,” he added, underscoring the broader institutional responsibility involved.

In a separate public statement, the university had described the episode as the result of an “ill-informed representative” rather than deliberate institutional misrepresentation. It maintained that the robotic model was displayed to familiarise students with advanced robotics platforms, not to falsely claim it as original research output.

The university has now initiated a detailed internal inquiry, even as the episode continues to generate debate about transparency, innovation claims and accountability within India’s higher education and AI ecosystem.