Delhi High Court invalidates Jamia VC’s appointments

On Wednesday, the Delhi High Court quashed the appointment of Prof. Eqbal Hussain as vice-chancellor and then acting vice-chancellor of Jamia Millia Islamia, holding that the appointment was not made in accordance with the relevant statute.

Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, however, ordered that the academic and administrative machinery of the university should not suffer or come to a complete halt and the new post of Vice-Chancellor (VC) would be appointed within a week.

The court also asked the ‘Visitor’, who is the President of India, to order the initiation of the process of appointing a permanent VC in the meantime.

“An order of Quo Warranto is hereby issued quashing the appointment of respondent No. 2 (Hussain) in the first instance to the post of Vice-Chancellor vide the Authority’s order dated 14/09/2023 and to the post of Acting Vice-Chancellor vide the Authority’s order dated 12/11/2023. Since respondent no. . 2 has not been appointed in accordance with the Statute, he cannot be permitted to continue to hold the office of Vice-Chancellor as Acting Vice-Chancellor,” the court ordered while hearing the petitions of Mr. Shami Ahmad Ansari and others.

“The appointment of VC (serving)/Administrator (interim) will be made within 1 week from the date of receipt of this order. “The commencement of appointment to the post of Vice-Chancellor on a regular basis shall commence no later than two weeks after the appointment of the Vice-Chancellor (Acting)/Administrator (Interim) and shall end within 30 days thereafter,” the court said.

On September 14, 2023, then VC Professor Najma Akhtar appointed Hussain as Pro VC of Jamia Millia Islamia (JMI). Subsequently, after Akhtar’s retirement on November 12, 2023, the Office of the Secretary issued another notification for Hussain to assume duties as VC.

The petitioners alleged that both the appointments were in violation of the provisions of the Jamia Millia Islamia Act (JMI Act) and regulations issued by the UGC.

The court observed that as per the procedure prescribed in the rules governing JMI, Hussain’s name, as the candidate recommended by the then VC for the post of Pro VC, should have been presented to the Executive Council for approval before his appointment.

He added that in case of any difference of opinion, the matter should be referred to the Visitor to overturn the council’s decision or refer the matter back to the VC to recommend a new name.

“It would again be the European Commission (Executive Council) that would have exclusive jurisdiction to appoint a new official if necessary. Considering the above analysis and factual findings, it is absolutely clear that the mandate contained in Art. 4 of the University Statute,” he said.

Holding that the initial appointment as Pro VC was contrary to the statute and in violation thereof, the court held that the subsequent appointment of Hussain as acting VC was also not valid.

The court found that at the time of Hussain’s appointment as acting VC, no “emergency situation” existed that could demonstrate compliance with the statute because the fact that the former VC intended to resign from the position was common knowledge and the statute stipulates that a professor holding the highest seniority who is one of the petitioners may be appointed as acting VC.

(This story has not been edited by Devdiscourse staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)