The Delhi High Court has put JNU’s Dismissal Of Congress MP and professor Angomcha Bimol Akoijam on hold, staying the university’s order after he told the Court that no notice was issued to him before the decision was taken.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Monday, November 2, 2026, stayed the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) order removing Congress Lok Sabha MP and JNU professor Angomcha Bimol Akoijam from service, and issued notice to the university on his petition challenging the termination [Angomcha Bimol Akoijam v. Jawaharlal Nehru University].
Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani passed the interim order. The matter will be heard next in January 2027.
The background
Akoijam, who was associated with JNU’s Centre for the Study of Social Systems in the School of Social Sciences, was dismissed with immediate effect on October 9, 2026. The dismissal followed an inquiry by the university’s internal committee into complaints of sexual harassment made by several women students. The committee recommended a major penalty, after which the JNU administration removed him.
The Delhi Police has also registered an FIR on the allegations, and the investigation is under way. Akoijam denies the allegations and has described the proceedings as politically motivated, alleging procedural lapses.
What happened in Court
Before the High Court, Akoijam’s counsel contended that no notice was issued to him before the dismissal decision was taken. On that submission, the Court stayed the termination order for now and sought JNU’s response.
The stay is an interim measure. The Court has not ruled on whether the internal committee’s findings or the dismissal are valid, and JNU will put forward its case when it files its reply. The allegations made by the complainants, and Akoijam’s denial of them, remain to be tested in the proceedings before the Court and in the criminal investigation, where he is entitled to the presumption of innocence. The identities of the complainants are protected by law.
Why the order matters
Workplace sexual harassment inquiries carry real consequences for both complainants and the accused, and the law requires them to follow a fair procedure, including a chance for the person accused to respond before a major penalty is imposed. A claim that the final decision was taken without notice goes to that core requirement, which is why courts tend to examine it closely at the threshold.
At the same time, an interim stay on procedural grounds is not a finding on the complaints themselves. How the High Court finally weighs the process JNU followed against the seriousness of the allegations will be watched closely by universities and internal committees, given that the case involves a sitting MP and complaints by several students.
Case Title: Angomcha Bimol Akoijam v. Jawaharlal Nehru University
Bench: Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani, Delhi High Court
Date of Order: November 2, 2026
For the Petitioner: Moirangthem Gunedhor Singh, David Ahongsangbam, Hijam Chandrakumar and Ashlikumar Athokpam, Advocates