St. Stephen’s College on Wednesday (Sept 4) contended before the Delhi High Court that admitting a student under the ‘single girl child quota’, fixed by the Delhi University (DU), is violative of the right to equality before the law.Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
New Delhi: St. Stephen’s College argued before the Delhi High Court on Wednesday that the ‘single girl child quota’ imposed by Delhi University (DU) violates the constitutional right to equality before the law. The college’s counsel contended that the quota contravenes Articles 14, 15(3), 15(5), and 30 of the Constitution, asserting that allocating seats under this quota infringes upon these provisions.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma questioned whether the college had previously raised this objection, asking,
“Did you raise this objection anywhere earlier at any stage? Did you challenge this policy ever or write to them or file any case ever?”
In response, senior advocate Romy Chacko explained,
“This year, they agreed to allocate only 5 percent excess seats and admit one candidate per program. But now, we are forced to challenge it because, instead of one candidate, they are actually allocating 13 candidates.”
He added,
“We would have no problem admitting one girl child, but today DU argued that for BA (Prog) with 13 combinations, 13 girl child students must be admitted. The state cannot deny equality before the law.”
The submission made by St. Stephen’s College opposed by the counsel representing the petitioner students and Delhi University (DU), who pointed out that this objection had never been raised previously.
The DU counsel argued,
“Why did the college not challenge the varsity’s bulletin of information for admission if they are aggrieved by this provision?”
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma orally observed,
“For this, I think you (college) will have to challenge it separately.”
According to DU’s bulletin for admissions, one seat in each program at every college reserved under the ‘supernumerary quota for a single girl child.’ Parents or guardians (if the parents are deceased) must declare that the girl is their only child, with no other male or female siblings, for the academic session 2024-25.
The college’s counsel argued that this quota lacks legal foundation, stating,
“Fundamental rights cannot be taken away by an executive order. This has no statutory backing. All these quotas imposed on us have no statutory backing. Therefore, this particular quota is ultra vires Article 14, 15(3), 15(5), and 30.”
He further claimed that the college had initially agreed to the quota, but DU was now attempting to enforce something beyond what was outlined in the university bulletin.
The college’s counsel emphasized that minority institutions were being unfairly subjected to these quotas, saying,
“Today you are trying to impose something which is beyond the university’s bulletin.”
Advocate Mohinder Rupal, representing DU, noted that there are 7-8 minority colleges under the university, and only one college had raised this issue. He added that the college had not challenged the university’s bulletin at any point.
Rupal further argued that the college should not have jeopardized the students’ futures by refusing admission after the university already included their names on the list of selected candidates.
Towards the end of the hearing, the court expressed displeasure with the college’s request for additional time to respond to DU’s counter affidavit. The court pointed out that it heard arguments from 11:30 AM to 1 PM and from 2:30 PM to 4 PM, during which the college’s counsel had also presented their arguments.
The court scheduled the matter for further arguments Today (Sept 5) on specific limited points.
The petitioners’ case centers on the claim that, despite being allocated seats at St. Stephen’s for BA Economics (Hons) and BA Programme courses, their admissions were not finalized within the required time. Earlier, the court granted provisional admission to six students, noting that they had cleared the CUET exam and other formalities, and that their merit was not in question. Despite this, their admissions remained uncertain.
The college, however, appealed the decision to a division bench, which prevented the six students who had been provisionally admitted to St. Stephen’s College based on DU’s seat allocation from attending classes until the main petition is resolved.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Delhi University
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
